Hi everyone,
I have a new effect involving a ferrite toroid coil which is being pulsed at a very specific frequency, duty cycle and uses a permanent magnet with an air gap.
It seems to be self running once started and the source battery can be disconnected and the capacitor will maintain its charge and in fact gain energy.
I found this effect over a week ago and since then in my spare time have been trying to find what I could be overlooking. So far I have not found anything, so I invite anyone to comment as to what I may of missed.
The video demo: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L0AZkovLTT8
If the magnet is removed there is no effect
If the magnet has no air gap there is no effect
If the frequency is changed there is no effect
If I leave the battery connected it does not drain in voltage and actually seems to be charging the battery.
I have changed the mosfet with the same IRF640 and it is the same. I tried it with IRF840 and it works but not quite as good as the IRF640
The effect only seems to work at low voltage 2.80vdc is about the highest I got it to go so far.
Please feel free to share you comments or concerns.
Luc
Hi All.
It's my first report.
I'm South Korean.
Thanks.
gotoluc, I have the same result. I was testing JNL Labs 2sg episod 9.
I build up 556 timer one 555 for frequency, another for duty cycle.
It needs 12V 15mA without any load.
Ferrite toroid I built is yellow one with bifiler 40 wind each. one coil is connected with diode and 20W Halogen Lamp.
When anothe coil is directly connected to Fet IRF840 drain and + source after 1ohm register.
Amphere read from 1 ohm register is about - 30mA.
Frq. was 2kHz - 100kHz duty cycle was lessthan 10% -60%.
the lamp was full bright. magnet, pulse width, frequency asr not so critical.
But the Halogen lamp was off, the circuit needs 1.5-2.0 A almost fire up.
Thank gotoluc for your videos.
Quote from: gotoluc on March 13, 2010, 12:40:57 AM
It seems to be self running once started and the source battery can be disconnected and the capacitor will maintain its charge and in fact gain energy.
gotoluc,
I'm a little bit confused and can't understand what exactly is "running" here.
I see no current flowing in the coil, which explains no discharge from the battery or the cap. The coil is essentially a open circuit ! Its not doing anything just sitting there. If I'm wrong please correct me.
Now why no current is flowing, reason could be a faulty mosfet, or the mosfet is not getting enough trigger. (IRF640 needs at least 2V at the gate to turn on).
Other reason could be some leakage from the huge black battery that you are using for timer, may be its spilling an opposite current or reserve biasing the mosfet. The noise of switching must be charging the cap a bit.
Of course, you may have something which is generating some energy, but its not clear from this video test. You should collect this extra energy somewhere else (in another load), so that the circuit does not appear permanently open.
Say you do that, and the current is no longer a flat line, then the difference in power consumed in the coil and that dumped in another load will tell you how much it is generating, if at all.
Good work, keep it up.
Quote from: gotoluc on March 13, 2010, 12:40:57 AM
Hi everyone,
I have a new effect involving a ferrite toroid coil which is being pulsed at a very specific frequency, duty cycle and uses a permanent magnet with an air gap.
It seems to be self running once started and the source battery can be disconnected and the capacitor will maintain its charge and in fact gain energy.
I found this effect over a week ago and since then in my spare time have been trying to find what I could be overlooking. So far I have not found anything, so I invite anyone to comment as to what I may of missed.
The video demo: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L0AZkovLTT8
If the magnet is removed there is no effect
If the magnet has no air gap there is no effect
If the frequency is changed there is no effect
If I leave the battery connected it does not drain in voltage and actually seems to be charging the battery.
I have changed the mosfet with the same IRF640 and it is the same. I tried it with IRF840 and it works but not quite as good as the IRF640
The effect only seems to work at low voltage 2.80vdc is about the highest I got it to go so far.
Please feel free to share you comments or concerns.
Luc
A basic schematic for analysis would be great. Even just a block form presenting the coil current path and the switching current path, and how they are conected relative to each other.
I'm presuming (I don't like presuming.. LOL..) that the coil circuit and the signal circuit have independant current sources but share a common negative connection. Is that correct.??
Hopefully you're not just getting current leakage from the 555 circuit supply into the coil circuit supply via an internal body diode, or due to reverse peak voltage breakdown of the gate/source/sink junctions of the fet.
I think it's an interesting effect. If it can be made to translate into a higher output energy than the energy needed to run the 555 timer circuit then it's a winner.
Let's hope the effect cannot be attributed to your scope/meter connections adding current via the measurement instruments supply, or cross circuit leakage as previously mentioned.
Good luck. keep on keepin on
hoping for more info... cheers
Hi Luc,
I mainly agree with Omega_0 comments (EDIT: and with hoptoad too :) )
My notices:
1) Is not a 10 x multiplier missing from the gate-source voltage probe setting, is it really only 1V peak pulse amplitude from the 555 output to drive the FET? The battery gives 12V to the 555 timer?
If it is 1V only then your FET cannot really switch fully on. (Its threshold VGS voltage (IRF640) starts from about 2V but may go up to 4V due to manufacturing tolerances). This would explain why there is no current taken at the rest of the FET's ON-time while the Drain-Source path ought to be a near short circuit.
2) Would you mind measuring the toroid coil's inductance now that the magnets bias it? (Do not change the distance (air gap) setting when measuring, just unconnect the red and green clips and measure with the L meter the series coils.
I know you mentioned the toroid coils in series are over 1000mH i.e. 1 Henry without the magnets, right?
3) When you disconnect the battery and the voltage across the capacitor starts increasing, it shows there is no any real current through the coil: if it were, the voltage would be consumed from the 60uF capacitor in no time.
I think you created a resonant circuit at the output side of the FET, and the leaking needle pulses from the FET's gate-drain body capacitance pumps energy into the resonant circuit, the FET body diode rectifies it and this energy gets stored in the 60uF cap.
(By the way, is it really a 57.61uF capacitor? What is its tolarance, 5% or less? (What does "PROTECTED" mean? Very strange for me for a electrolytic capacitor such a value. :) )
Thanks, Gyula
Quote from: mindcalm on March 13, 2010, 02:10:05 AM
Hi All.
It's my first report.
I'm South Korean.
Thanks.
gotoluc, I have the same result. I was testing JNL Labs 2sg episod 9.
I build up 556 timer one 555 for frequency, another for duty cycle.
It needs 12V 15mA without any load.
Ferrite toroid I built is yellow one with bifiler 40 wind each. one coil is connected with diode and 20W Halogen Lamp.
When anothe coil is directly connected to Fet IRF840 drain and + source after 1ohm register.
Amphere read from 1 ohm register is about - 30mA.
Frq. was 2kHz - 100kHz duty cycle was lessthan 10% -60%.
the lamp was full bright. magnet, pulse width, frequency asr not so critical.
But the Halogen lamp was off, the circuit needs 1.5-2.0 A almost fire up.
Thank gotoluc for your videos.
Hi mindcalm,
Welcome to the forum!
Maybe you are aware of the CMOS version of the 556 dual timer, it is the TLC556, see here: http://focus.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/tlc556.pdf
It is fully compatible with the old 556 but has a much less current consumption without any load (about less than 1mA or so from 12V).
Would like to know what is the DC voltage across the Halogen lamp when it is fully bright and its current is about 30mA? Or I misundertand?
rgds, Gyula
EDIT: There is the LMC555 from National Semiconductor it is the CMOS version of the old 555, you would two from it, see here:
http://www.national.com/mpf/LM/LMC555.html#Overview
Quote from: gyulasun on March 13, 2010, 07:39:01 AM
1) Is not a 10 x multiplier missing from the gate-source voltage probe setting, is it really only 1V peak pulse amplitude from the 555 output to drive the FET? The battery gives 12V to the 555 timer?
If it is 1V only then your FET cannot really switch fully on.
In fact you are correct. I saw the video again and the upper trace is 1V only. The scope setting also shows 1V/div. So the fet is not conducting, most probably.
Gotoluc should replace the coil with another 1 ohm resistor and check the current again to rule out the fet issue.
gotoluc - nice work and well done vid. I find it fascinating as I've been thinking about something along this very line also. I think you may be onto something and even if some of the effects mentioned by others here seem to come into play I wouldn't give up on it. The best thing would be if you can use a voltage multiplier to boost it's output high enough to run the timer circuit and make the system a closed loop. Nice work!
Hi all,
thanks for your interest.
Many of the posted concerns have been tested prior to starting this topic. However to satisfy these questions and doubts I made a new video as I know it is had to believe that you can pulse a coil and more energy seems to come back. It took me over a week of testing different things after I found this effect to try to find what I could be overlooking but came up with nothing yet.
Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZvlsNZJQ3gQ
Luc
Hey Luc
If you could show a circuit of this it would be more clear as to what is going on.
You may just have something. The bat was just reinforcing the cap, as you intended, but once the cap is charged from the bat, from what you are showing, the bat is impeding the buildup on the cap.
Need a circuit to get a real grip.
Very good work
Mags
Luc,
Would it be possible for you to take some calorimetric readings? Cooling is an effect of the charge discharge, mag demag electric generation process described by Nicolay E. Zaev. JLN's preliminary measurements indicate the heat from joule loss in the his coil inductor is balanced by the cooling from the demag phase, resulting in an ambient temperature stability. Therefore, if your coil is not heating up, it indicates cooling and generation of electric power from work performed by the toroid material to reorder electron spin on the quantum level. By the way, what is your toroid material?
My guess would be he is making the cores ability to change field harder for the pulses from the coil, by having the magnet influence the cores field potential continuously. The magnet tightens the strings on the core guitar. So this tension will have a resonant freq at which if we pulse the coil with small pulses, we should get ring around the rosy, and the capacitor will get a pocket full of posies.
If what Luc has going is the real deal, just the experience of understanding it, will open doors to understanding in other things. We can make resonators and wind a no. of coils and yada yada yada, but to have a self runner sitting in front of you, imagine the ambition to expand on that seed.
The crazy thing is, you just need to tune the core tension, with a magnet. That is how the freq of operation will be determined, maybe, and of course by the size and type of core. Just plucking the flux guitar.
Luc, if you move the magnet further away, try lowering the freq as you do, to see if the operating freq of the effect changes. Im thinking that the stronger and closer the magnet to the core, the higher freq of resonance. Is your freq band of this operation tight or loose? Or does the freq stay the same whether the mag is near or far, and the distance just determines how high the voltage gets on the cap, at that freq? Just somethings to try
Its magnet infused core is the same thing, just different geometry. I suppose the size of the core and what it is made of will determine how fast the flux change happens, there by influencing the freq of operation also.
This is good stuff.
Mags
Great work Luc,
Hope you have found a winner.
A question if I may -
Does this effect only occur with your specially wound, two half, coil. Would one get a similar result from say a bifilar wound coil ?
Regards, Penno
Hi all,
another update.
I believe when the Toroids magnet and pulse Frequency perimeters are all set right the Toroid coil goes into Resonance. Since connecting my probe or bringing any ferromagnetic material close by the Toroid has a negative effect (becomes out of tune).
I tried collecting Flyback and it is possible, however when I do the math it all comes to the same. What I mean is, the flyback energy you collect is that much less going back to the source capacitor.
I made a new video to further explain the the importance of the Frequency, Duty Cycle and mostly the Permanent magnet that without it there is no Frequency I ever found that will create this effect.
If we think about it ::)... I only remove the magnet from the toroid coil and it starts to use current, so how can the energy that was going back to the source of been coming from the MOSFET gate pulse and now suddenly stop???
New video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Fb5FOfme1g
I'll answer specific questions soon.
Luc
Hi Luc,
Thanks for your explanations in the second video.
Now my understanding on your circuit is that the MOSFET output capacitance (CDS and the 44.6mH toroidal coil forms a parallel resonant circuit at 18.8kHz. How?
See the data sheet for your IRF640: http://www.irf.com/product-info/datasheets/data/irf640n.pdf
See Fig. 5 in Page 4, and the output capacitance curve, Coss, shows about 1500-1600pF at 1V drain-source voltage (taken at VGS=0V).
And if you calculate the C value from the 18.8kHz resonant frequency using the 44.6mH toroid coil value, you get 1.61nF capacitor value! (I used this online calculator: http://www.whatcircuits.com/lc-resonance-frequency-calculator/ )
This explains why the distance of the magnets from the core is so precisely needed to adjust: you simply change and fine tune the toroidal inductance for the best value for getting the highest output voltage which can occur at the highest impedance a parallel LC circuit provides. No resonance=no max output. The drastic change in the output capacitance also explains why you find the "effect" works at no higher than 2.8V DC: the capacitance gets reduced under the 1000pF values and the LC circuit impedance becomes lower and lower. You seem to nicely finetune the output circuit for most favorable match of the components that ensures the highest possible output.
The battery surely limits the rising of the capacitor voltage and there must be some charging current also flowing into the battery from the cap.
The phenomena of your needing to place the battery back into the circuit to get the "effect" again (after that the cap was fully discharged) is explained by also the 'wrong' value of the output capacitance at zero drain-source value: it simply much higher than 1.6nF and the battery voltage brings it within range. (Just check your unused IRF640 drain source output capacitance in itself, not connected anywhere but to a C meter if you have one, first short circuit the gate-source pins with a piece of wire to really switch it off because the higher than 1nF gate-source input cap likes to store voltage for a longer time.)
There remains to explain your flat current trace during the ON time of the FET but unfortunately I cannot give a correct explanation yet. One possibility:
I think the mistery "flat current" trace of mainly zero value is not really zero but its average value is much smaller than for instance in the case of the 10 Ohm resistor. Because the FET switched output resistance looks like to be higher than 10 Ohm due to the low duty cycle drive it receives at the gate-source input. I know this does not fully explain it though, will be thinking on it. And others here are kindly invited to share their thoughts.
rgds, Gyula
So what some may be speculating is that at resonance, the circuit is using no power and collecting from the 555 pulses through the gate to bring the cap voltage up. Do you have a resistor between the 555 out and gate?
Mags
That is a very interesting explanation Gyula ;)
Thanks for putting all this together.
Is the IRF840 also the same capacitance? because I get the same effect with it also.
Looking forward to further explanations.
Thanks for your help as usual.
Luc
Quote from: gotoluc on March 13, 2010, 04:09:40 PM
...
I made a new video to further explain the the importance of the Frequency, Duty Cycle and mostly the Permanent magnet that without it there is no Frequency I ever found that will create this effect.
If we think about it ::)... I only remove the magnet from the toroid coil and it starts to use current, so how can the energy that was going back to the source of been coming from the MOSFET gate pulse and now suddenly stop???
New video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Fb5FOfme1g
...
Hi Luc,
Just watched your 3rd video and now I think I know why you have a flat current line during the FET on-time.
It is explained by the resonant circuit high impedance: THERE IS current but very much less than say in the case of the 10 Ohm resistor.
And when you drastically detune the LC circuit from 18.8 or so kHz, by removing the magnet, the high impedance immediately gets reduced and current is taken from the capacitor (or from the battery if it is connected).
rgds, Gyula
Quote from: Magluvin on March 13, 2010, 04:26:49 PM
So what some may be speculating is that at resonance, the circuit is using no power and collecting from the 555 pulses through the gate to bring the cap voltage up. Do you have a resistor between the 555 out and gate?
Mags
Hi Mags,
no I don't have one. I can add it. How high of value can I go?
Luc
Hi Luc,
May I ask you what kind of a scope are you using?
Hi Luc,
It may be that the switching device you are searching for is a solid state relay.
With this, you can totally isolate the two halves of your circuit.
Must admit though, I am like you, not all that strong in electronics.
Good LUCk
Penno
Quote from: gotoluc on March 13, 2010, 04:34:37 PM
...
Is the IRF840 also the same capacitance? because I get the same effect with it also.
...
Yes, more or less it has similar capacitances in the 1-2V range too, maybe a bit higher than for the IRF640, see Figure 5, Page 4:
http://www.vekoy.com/UserFiles/File/PDF-liitteet/IRF840.pdf
Gyula
Quote from: Omnibus on March 13, 2010, 04:38:23 PM
Hi Luc,
May I ask you what kind of a scope are you using?
It's a 200MHz USB scope, DSO-5200
Comes also with a software spectrum analyzer
You can buy them on eBay.
Luc
If you have the time, a circuit diagram would be very useful indeed. I'm perplexed - in that I think I understand that when you disconnect the battery, you're leaving an open circuit in the drain/source path that's pulsing the core - if that's right (which it may not be), then what in the world would you still need to continue pulsing the gate for?
A circuit diagram would be brilliant :) Also - you probably have, or maybe not, but what affect does placing a pickup coil near the magnets have on the effect? Its all very exciting! I'd like to go patch up a replication but I'm unsure of the specifics of your circuit.
Thank you for your ingenuitive work, its inspiring.
Quote from: gyulasun on March 13, 2010, 04:45:46 PM
Yes, more or less it has similar capacitances in the 1-2V range too, maybe a bit higher than for the IRF640, see Figure 5, Page 4:
http://www.vekoy.com/UserFiles/File/PDF-liitteet/IRF840.pdf
Gyula
Thanks Gyula
So even if I had an OPTO isolator this would happen also?
Luc
Quote from: gotoluc on March 13, 2010, 04:36:54 PM
Hi Mags,
no I don't have one. I can add it. How high of value can I go?
Luc
I ran a 10k for my orbon. If your setup runs well with it, then maybe you can discount the 555 powering your cap.
I dont think it is, the fact that you remove the magnet and good effect stops, tells us that power is not coming from the 555. But to satisfy the needy, the 10k res, if the effect is the same, then your on your way to stardom.
Mags
Luc, the point at which the caps started going negative in voltage after the coil was disconnected and the caps were quickly drained with the 10 Ohm resistor and before the 1.2 volt battery was put back on -- I take that as a good sign - as the coil was hooked back up at that point and since the only power in the circuit could be coming from the timer circuit and it was actually reversing the charge - it seem that may be important to note since if they were charging in a positive way then you might have to consider the voltage was leaking through from the timer circuit. I think (may be way off here) that would indicate the timer circuit is NOT putting voltage into the caps. And that's great news!
Quote from: gotoluc on March 13, 2010, 04:53:37 PM
...
So even if I had an OPTO isolator this would happen also?
...
Well, what does your circuit do you assembled? I think the point is you created an LC tank circuit, the L is a magnet-tuneable toroidal cored coil and the C is a voltage-dependent capacitor made from the drain-source output capacitance of a MOSFET.
The energy input to tank circuit can only come from the 'kicks' as the gate-source input pulse 'leaks' through the gate-drain capacitance (also voltage dependent) to the drain-source side and pumps energy into the tank just like you push a child on a swing periodically to maintain the swinging speed.
So if you try to use a device for kicking the tank and the device has very small unwanted coupling capacitance for instance, then you reduce the energy input that otherwise would be there like in case of a MOSFET. However, using a different device for the switching, it would need the same 'cut and try' i.e. much fine-tuning to find the best match between the tank and the input device.
Or maybe originally you did not wish to create a tank circuit you finally got as the result, but you wished to make something useful with a toroidal core +coil on it + permanent magnet combination. Then the use of the opto isolator is also a question if it is needed for you. Sorry, do not misunderstand me, I try to answer your question. Magluvin's suggestion of a series 10 kOhm (or maybe higher) can be an answer where the energy comes from, this test is equivalent with using a MOSFET that has only ,say, a much less (some pF, not 500-1000pF) gate-drain capacitance than your FETs have now.
Gyula
@gotoluc,
Excellent demo. What I would do, though is somewhat rhetorical
is record the frequency and duty cycle that seems to be optimal
and build a fixed frequency source that uses very little power
and operates from the main battery/capacitor with just the
required frequency and duty cycle. Some PUT Programable
Unijunction Transistor circuits seem to be inherently high
impedance circuit designs. Note that the mosfet doesn't require
very much gate current because of it's extraordinary gain but
the voltage needs to be at least .7Vdc above mosfet source to
drain voltage for it to turn fully on.
Below the purpose built frequency source I would build a voltage
doubler - voltage multiplier power supply ...producing just enough
current to keep the frequency source running. With design skill you
should be able to use small enough power to keep the toroid coil
running and gaining from the capacitor. You may be able to
have the PUT oscillator circuit bootstrap it's own power.
I think this is doable...but then you will need to figure out where
the extra energy is coming from; internally or externally of the
toroid. You will have achieved an overunity design in any case.
Which is a step in the right direction.
:S:MarkCoffman
Good suggestions MS
Luc have you tried to run it at 12v instead of 1.2? If it takes no current it should run safe. Put a 12v stop light bulb and use it inline with the bat as a fuse that never blows and shows problems. The stoplight bulb will deliver good amperage for what you are doing while the filament is cold. We use 100w bulbs inline to test amplifiers that have problems. Lil trick
But if you can get the coil to run even 5v or greater to keep the 555 going all together, it would be something to see.
Mags
Well, it's no go with the 10K resistor on the 555 output and the mosfet gate :P
Back to the drawing board ;D
Luc
Ok so we know something. I need to get rid of my 10k resistor. lol
I wonder if you can put a pickup coil on the opposite end of that magnet without disturbing the tcore.
Mags
Heck try the 12v in the cap. Run it all on the cap. give it an alligator clip. the effect may be better at higher volts.
Mags
Quote from: Magluvin on March 13, 2010, 06:39:51 PM
Ok so we know something. I need to get rid of my 10k resistor. lol
I wonder if you can put a pickup coil on the opposite end of that magnet without disturbing the tcore.
Mags
I've mentioned that anything ferromagnetic brought close to the Toroid coil affects it. Seems to be an indication of a Resonant state.
Luc
Quote from: Magluvin on March 13, 2010, 06:41:54 PM
Heck try the 12v in the cap. Run it all on the cap. give it an alligator clip. the effect may be better at higher volts.
Mags
I've also mentioned that 2.80vdc is about the maximum voltage the input can be. Anything higher and it starts to consume current from the input capacitor.
Luc
Gyula has explained this at the Energetic Forum:The 2.8V limiting is explained by the drain-source capacitance change vs drain-source DC voltage: if the voltage is increased the capacitance decreases, hence the resonant frequency of the LC circuit created would also change. But because the input frequency does not change from the 555, the voltage on the drain side should stay where is was earlier, if it is changed by force from outside for instance then the drain-source capacitance would also change so the parallel LC resonance high impedance would suffer where the max voltage come from.
Gyula
Well could the resonant freq of the coil be changing as the voltage there rises? Could it be possible to follow the ring with the freq gen?
Mags
Quote from: Magluvin on March 13, 2010, 07:33:57 PM
Well could the resonant freq of the coil be changing as the voltage there rises? Could it be possible to follow the ring with the freq gen?
Mags
Frequency change is one part of Gyula's explanation that is not quite so. I did experiment with changing the frequency as the voltage rises some days ago. The best score was 2.83vdc. Anything higher than that it starts to consume current from the cap bank no matter how much tuning I do.
I wish it was not so but it is.
Luc
Hey Luc
Just one more thing, what is the voltage of the output pulse from the 555 on the gate of the fet?
Mags
Quote from: Magluvin on March 13, 2010, 08:24:26 PM
Hey Luc
Just one more thing, what is the voltage of the output pulse from the 555 on the gate of the fet?
Mags
Scope says 10.25vpp and 3.75vrms with 20% Duty at 20KHz
Luc
Hey Mags,
maybe we can work on this idea: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rLDgQg6bq7o
Seems strait forward ;D
Luc
Well
My rejoined reciprocating angle arm
Blew out at the Deflatchulater Or I would definitely be in!
Very funny Luc [very]
Chet
Hey Luc
Actually I had sent that to a few people earlier today, I initiated the link as to say that it explained an idea that they had and that this guy did it already.
Here is his other one that adds to the vocabulary even more. Starts the same but a bit better lingo as it goes.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lVZ8Ko-nss4&NR=1
Magslaffs
Thanks for clearing up the mosfet doubts.
I noted that the trace is exactly the same with coil disconnected, so the coil is essentially acting as an open circuit. One reason could be the high time constant (L/R) of the circuit. We don't have circuit diagram here, still assuming L=44mH, R=1ohm, V=1.2V, we get L/R as 44 ms.
Frequency is 18kHz so pulse cycle is 0.055 ms. and pulse on time is 55.5*22/100, or 0.012 ms.
Imax will be 1.2/1 = 1.2 amps
I at the end of 0.012 ms will be 1.2*(1-e^(-0.012/44)) = 0.0003 amp or 300 microamps !!
So you can see that the current rises to 300 uA and the pulse switches off. There is not enough time for the current to rise beyond your scope's detection threshold and it shows it as 0, which is right as 300 uA is practically 0.
You will need about a 100V supply to see any current flowing there. I'm pretty sure that the coil is not generating anything and merely acting as an open circuit, it can't switch on due to very high inductance and L/R and low voltage and tiny pulse width.
But I don't want to discourage you or anyone, so I'm leaving this thread now. It seems you did not like us "correcting" you, anyway. So simply assume that I'm wrong and go ahead, all the best.....
Hej Omega_0,
Please do not leave this thread... lol You (or others) here need not feel the 'need for leaving'. As long as conventional explanations are correct and scientific for clarifying the operation of a circuit, anybody should be welcome to come forward with correct contributions.
I agree with your calculations, one addition is Luc measured his toroidal coil DC resistance as 6.8 Ohm so the peak current was 1.2/6.8=0.176A and the the current at the end of 12ms was 322uA but this pretty much the same low current you got with the 1 Ohm assumption.
rgds, Gyula
EDIT: Just noticed, member EMdevices calculated the same order of small current (he got 350uA) at another forum.
Quote from: Omega_0 on March 14, 2010, 04:11:32 AM
Thanks for clearing up the mosfet doubts.
I noted that the trace is exactly the same with coil disconnected, so the coil is essentially acting as an open circuit. One reason could be the high time constant (L/R) of the circuit. We don't have circuit diagram here, still assuming L=44mH, R=1ohm, V=1.2V, we get L/R as 44 ms.
Frequency is 18kHz so pulse cycle is 0.055 ms. and pulse on time is 55.5*22/100, or 0.012 ms.
Imax will be 1.2/1 = 1.2 amps
I at the end of 0.012 ms will be 1.2*(1-e^(-0.012/44)) = 0.0003 amp or 300 microamps !!
So you can see that the current rises to 300 uA and the pulse switches off. There is not enough time for the current to rise beyond your scope's detection threshold and it shows it as 0, which is right as 300 uA is practically 0.
You will need about a 100V supply to see any current flowing there. I'm pretty sure that the coil is not generating anything and merely acting as an open circuit, it can't switch on due to very high inductance and L/R and low voltage and tiny pulse width.
But I don't want to discourage you or anyone, so I'm leaving this thread now. It seems you did not like us "correcting" you, anyway. So simply assume that I'm wrong and go ahead, all the best.....
Hi Omega,
please don't think that I'm not looking for corrections. This was the very reason I started the topic and why I had the ? at the end of the topic title.
Electronics is not my strong side so when I find an effect I usually ask for opinions from everyone. I have no problem learning something new.
@everyone, I may have been to quick to conclude when I added the 10K Ohm resistor on the 555 output. I looked at it today with the scope and it's way to much resistance for the mosfet gate to operate. It looks like the maximum resistance that can be added without affecting the gate would be around 200 Ohms.
I'm testing a few other things and will post what I find in a few days.
Thanks for all your interest and help.
Luc
This is a very informative video on magnetic transfer.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mLd_py1xTO8
@Gotoluc: When you construct a coil of bigger dimensions and higher inductance, so that you can push the 555 frequency below 2-3 kHz then you could use an optocoupler or photovoltaic driver like PVI1050N and possibly exclude the suspicion of power being transfered from the 555 circuit via the MOSFET and being solely responsible for the operation of the circuit without battery. A tiny audio-application 1:1 transformer might work for higher frequencies to isolate the MOSFET but most likely it`s inductance will need to be taken into consideration for the oscillation circuit.
Just a thought, keep it up!
@xenomorphlabs
The optoisolator is a good idea...I'm sure there are some that operate
at 1Mhz. Any AC or DC flowing to the gate will have been developed all
on the coil side, except for a very small capacitive coupling as listed on
its specification sheet.
Also, he can use capacitive coupling to the mosfet. Assuming a 16percent
pulse duty cycle the low will sit at/near ground. Just increase the capacitance
until the signal looks about the same on both sides of the cap. That will
block any unwanted DC from flowing to the gate. Also, decrease the drive
signal until it is 2.5+0.7 = 3.2*vpp* using a resistive voltage divider on the IC
side. He is overdriving the mosfet that should have voltage gain of 1.0e^6.,
and at 19Khz the signal is not RF. The above is called interstage coupling.
The opto is the best idea though it will block DC and most AC from the driver.
:S:MarkSCoffman
Hi Folks,
I see this problem differently.
I think the problem is not 'overdriving' the MOSFET gate with DC and AC which then leaks through.
The problem is the MOSFET itself that has interelectrode voltage dependent capacitances, so it is very far from an ideal switch in this respect.
If you accept Luc used the MOSFET's output capacitance as the C member of a resonant LC tank circuit, then it will be the same whether you use opto coupling at its gate input. And the MOSFET's gate-drain capacitance will also remain the same value as the data sheet says, where the input pulses can leak through regardless of the input opto.
The better solid state switch would be like a low power photovoltaic relay, this still has an output capacitance of some hundred pF at low operating voltages but at least it has a high input-output isolation. Like this (but other firms may have a better product already):
http://www.irf.com/product-info/datasheets/data/pvg612.pdf
@Mark, I do not get this:
"Also, decrease the drive signal until it is 2.5+0.7 = 3.2*vpp* using a resistive voltage divider on the IC side."
What is the 2.5V and what is the 0.7V?
Thanks, Gyula
EDIT: The opto isolator is a good solution in input-output separation, but the power MOSFET high (nanoFarad) output capacitance with its voltage dependence stays the same.
Hi everyone,
I have some good news.
As I write this the coil is self running (NO BATTERY ATTACHED TO CAP BANK) and the voltage is at 19.45 Volts DC and rising ;D
I also added a pickup coil with diode, capacitor and 50K Ohm load and it is at 1.03 volt dc.
I changed my MOSFET gate driver to a SG3525A circuit which I built some time back and immediately had much more success compared to the 555 PWM.
Here is the new video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_sicsnUq_a4
The core of the toroid is a regular ferrite 1"-3/8 OD, 13/16" ID and 7/16" high. The coil is wound 5 layers of 24 AWG on each half. One wound CCW and the other CW. Inductance is 1,050mH and 7.6 Ohms with coils bridged together.
I will be limited in time to answer questions for the rest of the week.
Luc
Here is a base circuit for the SG3525A:
Thanks for sharing.. nice work!
4Tesla
@Stefan
I would like to consider entering my Magnet Self Running Coil for the Overunity prize.
Please let me know what needs to be done if I do so.
Thanks
Luc
Nice work Luc. =]
How is the climb, is it better? Or even the better question, is the output more than the voltage running the pwm circuit. =]
Very cool so the magnet can tune the core to ring. I know you need to limit questions, but just 2 more and I will let you work. The coils on the tcore, when powered, is it both N on one end where the coils meet, and both S on the other, or are they full circle? Sorry if it was discussed earlier. Just want to clarify.
And what, if you know, was the difference between the SG and the 555 that made things happen? Anything noticable? Thanks, and great What If's that got you here. ;]
Mags
Luc, nice work. Sorry, but I do not understand your video very well. Your scope shot shows 60v input. Where is that being produced? Why 60v ? I am totally lost now.
Bill
@Luc
Thank you for sharing. Please can you post a quick sketch of your circuit. This would remove any ambiguities for me and others who want to replicate your findings.
The video is a bit confusing, he says there is no current being drawn, but there must be *some* current (mA) being drawn to drive the pulse circuit.
How can this be self running when he has that very large battery connected?
The pickup coil with the rectifier charging the other cap needs to be removed (for now) to have a clearer picture of this setup.
I would hope the next step is to run the pulse circuit from his Cap bank...
Thanks nice work Luc.
Quote from: gyulasun on March 15, 2010, 07:52:41 PM
Hi Folks,
I see this problem differently.
I think the problem is not 'overdriving' the MOSFET gate with DC and AC which then leaks through.
The problem is the MOSFET itself that has interelectrode voltage dependent capacitances, so it is very far from an ideal switch in this respect.
If you accept Luc used the MOSFET's output capacitance as the C member of a resonant LC tank circuit, then it will be the same whether you use opto coupling at its gate input. And the MOSFET's gate-drain capacitance will also remain the same value as the data sheet says, where the input pulses can leak through regardless of the input opto.
@Mark, I do not get this:
"Also, decrease the drive signal until it is 2.5+0.7 = 3.2*vpp* using a resistive voltage divider on the IC side."
What is the 2.5V and what is the 0.7V?
Thanks, Gyula
OK...Well, he seems to have picked a better solution...A little bit risky one
but I guess he won with it. Circuits may not be that efficient and may require
lots of extra components.
The interelectrode capacitance of that particular Mosfet... was the problem.
High power transistors have more capacitance...This is going to let AC through
no matter even if the DC is blocked. Rectified AC = power. Also operating fets
on low voltage is tricky..they like 10Vdc or more.
2.5V = approximate maximum voltage on the bulk capacitors actually 2.85Vdc
0.7V = one silicon voltage (pedestal) drop that mosfets like to see on their Gate
when Source is operated <8Vdc. This will minimize fet drive AC.
With an opto, that same thing *would* happen except input AC power would be
coming from the bulk capacitor side...If you could make it work based in the
efficiency.
---
gotoluc;
Good work so far, show us the circuit and your current set up.
A you-tube video would be nice. Voltages are now getting a
little bit on high side. Don't let free run-time cause the capacitors
to overcharge and exceed their WVDC working voltage. This
part of your circuit is really going to need some more work.
Don't blow it, now. ;) Overunity Yea! :o Sell Oil, buy Ferrites :D
:S:MarkCoffman
Quote from: mscoffman on March 16, 2010, 09:41:31 AM
...
The interelectrode capacitance of that particular Mosfet... was the problem.
High power transistors have more capacitance...This is going to let AC through no matter even if the DC is blocked. Rectified AC = power. Also operating fets on low voltage is tricky..they like 10Vdc or more.
2.5V = approximate maximum voltage on the bulk capacitors actually 2.85Vdc
0.7V = one silicon voltage (pedestal) drop that mosfets like to see on their Gate when Source is operated <8Vdc. This will minimize fet drive AC.
With an opto, that same thing *would* happen except input AC power would be coming from the bulk capacitor side...If you could make it work based in the efficiency.
...
Hi Mark,
Ok, now I understand what you meant with the 2.5V and I agree with that, and agree with all the rest I quoted from you above, however, I do not think we can speak about the 0.7V silicon voltage in the gate-source relation of a MOSFET. These FETs are manufactured as insulated-gate MOSFETs, meaning the gate is almost a pure capacitance with respect to the source or drain electrodes. Maximum gate source voltage rating normally +/-20V on the gate wrt source, within this voltage range the gate is an open circuit for DC and a capacitance for AC.
I am aware of DC pre-biasing the gate of a MOSFET to help ease AC driving requirements but then it is the minimum gate treshold voltage (V
TH) which should be considered as starting voltage level, (2V if I recall correctly in case of IRF640 and DC bias the gate to 1.7-1.8V or so).
Re on Luc latest youtube video: I think he still utilizes the MOSFET output capacitance to reach resonance with his still magnetically tuned toroidal coil but now the output capacitance is much lower (about 250pF) because the DC voltage across the drain source is about 17.6V and he is now at the 36.7kHz range instead of the 18-19kHz used earlier.
It would be good to know what was the drawback in using the 555 and why he found the SG IC is better? Maybe operating frequency range was wider for the SG IC?
rgds, Gyula
@gotoluc,
Just saw Video Test #4.
Quote: "this can't possibly be leakage through the mosfet gate
charging the bulk capacitors"
me: Oh yes it can be... not the DC but a rectified AC pumping
action through the gate-to-source interelectrode capacitance of
a power mosfet. The same way a disposable camera flash unit
has a 3volt battery charging up a 300 volt capacitor.
gotoluc find a large bandwidth optoisolator and drive the gate
of the mosfet through that. If you have any opto in your parts
supply try that. Use your scope to make sure the input and
output signals end up the same shape eventually.
You may need a small or large mosfet to drive the led of the
opto. 10ma @ 12Vdc through a 470ohm resistor. When you
are looking at the opto spec sheet try to find the led to output
line capacitance of the opto...it should be a few pf's, very
small. The Opto should have NPN ouput.
On the output side of the opto, they bring the base of an
output transistor out, put a 100K ohm resistor or whatever the
spec sheet on the opto says to the opto collector. Connect
opto collector to the caps. Connect the emitter to the mosfet
gate. You will need a pull down resistor to pull the gate to
ground. Now use your o'scope to make sure all your signals look
correct. That the gate of the mosfet goes to ground and that it
is turning on fully. (The mosfet gate could also be pulled down
by the opto but you would need to invert the opto drive signal
and gate pulled up by a resistor).
That will do it...LF AC can not flow through a few pf's so any
energy driving the gate comes through the bulk capacitors. If
you adjust the resistors higher and use your scope to keep the
signals clean, that should work. The mosfet drive circuit will
then be properly decoupled from the signal source. Then your
above quote will be true.
---
By the way I like your using of a external probe pickup coil to
look at signals external to toroid. You may be able pick up these
b curl fields or saturation fields to help determan what is going
on, outside the toroid.
---
@ gyulasun
these details shouldn't matter...the mosfet should at least start
working, if it stops working at higher voltages it could then be
debugged. The higher that AC gate voltage the more drive
energy there is to leak through.
The SG IC is optimised for mosfets. It probably uses the bipolar
transistor to terminate stuff. They spend a whole lot of time
optimizing those circuit but only for particular apps.
:S:MarkSCoffman
I think what luc is getting at is, if it takes virtually zero input to get the higher voltage, and if the SG circuit is very low in input, that the cap voltage will soon be at par with being able to run everything. I would suggest some regulation to the sg chip unless it has self regulation to maintain freq position.
The key was to get above the 12v battery in order to replace it.
The Sg3525 uses 5ma to run the oscillator, and if the output load is nill, he should be able to run the SG chip circuit with his output.
So he is only a couple steps away from looping this thing, if not there already with 1 step. =]
I have a couple of these chips I am going to try on the Orbonbon. There are some simpler circuits than shown above to get one up and running.
Mags
JL Naudin have the same simple principle ... Really Impressive !
Look at:
2SGen, an amazing tiny Solid State Generator by JL Naudin:
http://jlnlabs.online.fr/2SGen/index.htm (french)
http://jlnlabs.online.fr/2SGen/indexen.htm (english)
"The hidden principle: the core magnetization/demagnetization process"
Diagram, parts, wire gage, etc ... every thing is there.
So, to have more information goto JLN web site.
Everything is there, including the scientific explanation.
I hope this will help :)
LightRider
Hello Luc,
I like your video, which I found when looking for "solid state orbo" replications.
Unfortunately it is impossible to follow your explanations without schematics. I know how much work it is to provide meaningfull schematics, but it would be very helpful to base the discussion on solid grounds.
I am very interested in what you are doing with the toroid, magnets and the pick up coil and would like to replicate it.
I built an orbo replication (just the motor part) and found it very difficult to come up with a sound mechanical design. My "orbo" is turning quite nicely but the torque is very low. So I did not bother to add pic up coils, the output would be way below the input to the toroids.
My contraption starts spinning with about 0,5 Watts per toroid. And I can not send more than about 4 Watts trough each toroid (which makes my "orbo" spin wildly), otherwise they become hot quickly. So, coming up with something that spins quite nicely is easy. Getting more output than input is the difficulty (which everybody will have noticed by now). Steorn uses magnet bearings and a very high turn rate and still the output seems to be rather low, even negligible.
So I switched my little research efforts to "solid state orbos".
I follow the efforts of Mr. Naudin http://jnaudin.free.fr/2SGen/indexen.htm , but can not even replicate his results (I get much less output for what I put in than he does).
Greetings, Conrad
Quote from: Magluvin on March 16, 2010, 05:20:32 PM
I think what luc is getting at is, if it takes virtually zero input to get the higher voltage, and if the SG circuit is very low in input, that the cap voltage will soon be at par with being able to run everything. I would suggest some regulation to the sg chip unless it has self regulation to maintain freq position.
The key was to get above the 12v battery in order to replace it.
The Sg3525 uses 5ma to run the oscillator, and if the output load is nill, he should be able to run the SG chip circuit with his output.
So he is only a couple steps away from looping this thing, if not there already with 1 step. =]
I have a couple of these chips I am going to try on the Orbonbon. There are some simpler circuits than shown above to get one up and running.
Mags
@magluvin
That *is* the other way to do it. A quick look at the Mot. SG3525
spec sheet shows that it has an internal (series) voltage regulator.
Vcc= 8->35Vdc for an internal => 5.1Vdc...all systems should
be go.
If one needs to go to microwatts a digital circuit like in a digital
watch could be used. It all depends on what is needed. That is
- if there is non-input supplied gain there. I'll keep my fingers
crossed. Also medium or smaller power mosfet will have less
internal parasitic capacitance therefore require less AC drive
power at the expense of slightly higher source-to-drain resistance.
This may be reasonable trade since the coil doesn't draw anything
on average, just in the on/off pulses.
:S:MarkSCoffman
Quote from: conradelektro on March 17, 2010, 01:00:16 PM
Unfortunately it is impossible to follow your explanations without schematics. I know how much work it is to provide meaningfull schematics, but it would be very helpful to base the discussion on solid grounds.
The circuit diagram needs not to be drawn with some nice software. A hand-drawn and scanned or photographed sketch would be ok. This doesn't take much time, but it would improve the understanding a lot. For me it's also not clear how the components are connected.
Hi everyone,
I took some time off today to do some more experiments as I can't stop thinking about this setup and I'm sure that goes for many of you.
I made 2 new video's to which I hope will answer some questions and help understand the effect.
Sorry I can't answer individual questions. I rather use the limited time I have to continue experimenting and posting videos that will hopefully cover everything one would need to make a successful replication.
@Gyula, can you please explain how the 3vpp measured gate leak between the source and drain is capable of keeping the circuit running NOW at 30vdc, 57KHz with 50% duty cycle without using any current and maintaining 1.90vdc on the pickup coil with 49,850 Ohm load. Thank you for your help and time
Test 5 video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RhrYzBld74w
Test 6 video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UflGpzijWIA
Luc
Quote from: mscoffman on March 17, 2010, 04:04:14 PM
@magluvin
That *is* the other way to do it. A quick look at the Mot. SG3525
spec sheet shows that it has an internal (series) voltage regulator.
Vcc= 8->35Vdc for an internal => 5.1Vdc...all systems should
be go.
If one needs to go to microwatts a digital circuit like in a digital
watch could be used. It all depends on what is needed. That is
- if there is non-input supplied gain there. I'll keep my fingers
crossed. Also medium or smaller power mosfet will have less
internal parasitic capacitance therefore require less AC drive
power at the expense of slightly higher source-to-drain resistance.
This may be reasonable trade since the coil doesn't draw anything
on average, just in the on/off pulses.
:S:MarkSCoffman
Naudin used optos to drive his MOSFET in his set-up at 200 Hz and gets the same effect, so at least in his set-up he demonstrates that there is no leakage into the coil circuit.
So Gotoluc must decide if he really wants to spend too much effort on excluding that possibility in his set-up.
After all the effect is well explained by Naudin.
Quote from: xenomorphlabs on March 17, 2010, 05:15:43 PM
Naudin used optos to drive his MOSFET in his set-up at 200 Hz and gets the same effect, so at least in his set-up he demonstrates that there is no leakage into the coil circuit.
So Gotoluc must decide if he really wants to spend too much effort on excluding that possibility in his set-up.
After all the effect is well explained by Naudin.
I'm refering to the link;
http://jlnlabs.online.fr/2SGen/indexen.htm
If I'm using the wrong reference please correct me.
No...he proves that what appears to be toroid external coupling
of flux from the coil is not due to any *characteristic of
the instrumentation signal generator*. It's not *overunity* that is driven
by a six volt battery. Just toroid external flux driven by an 6 volt
battery.
Then he powers the signal generator from the six volt battery too.
What is happening is that the magnet is saturating the toroid
material and therefore coil flux is pushed outside the toroid.
The magnetic saturation of the toroid material has to be what is
happening when the coils inductance changes from 1000mh to
44mh when the magnet is in place. Shown by gotoluc. This change
of inductance is a radical thing and is most unexpected.
Nuadin has not proved overunity at all when it has been shown that
the toroid is not accepting flux. One expects that the toroid will
always accept external flux but I can see from the inductance change
that strong magnets are saturating it.
Now is there any overunity energy or not?
gotoluc has got the goods and it's definitely his turn! :)
:S:MarkSCoffman
Quote from: mscoffman on March 17, 2010, 05:52:40 PM
I'm refering to the link;
http://jlnlabs.online.fr/2SGen/indexen.htm
If I'm using the wrong reference please correct me.
No...he proves that what appears to be toroid external coupling
of flux from the coil is not due to any *characteristic of
the instrumentation signal generator*. It's not *overunity* that is driven
by a six volt battery. Just toroid external flux driven by an 6 volt
battery.
Then he powers the signal generator from the six volt battery too.
What is happening is that the magnet is saturating the toroid
material and therefore coil flux is pushed outside the toroid.
The magnetic saturation of the toroid material has to be what is
happening when the coils inductance changes from 1000mh to
44mh when the magnet is in place. Show by gotoluc. This change
of inductance is a radical thing and is most unexpected.
Nuadin has not proved overunity at all when it has been shown that
the toroid is not accepting flux. One expects that the toroid will
always accept external flux but I can see from the inductance change
that strong magnets are saturating it.
Now is there any overunity energy or not?
gotoluc has got the goods and it's definitely his turn! :)
:S:MarkSCoffman
Have you read the recommended literature:
"Ferrites and Ferromagnetics Free Energy Generation"
http://jlnlabs.online.fr/2SGen/images/demag.pdf ?
Also worth looking at is the last video showing the hysteresis changes occuring when the magnet is added.
Hi all,
please find attached circuit. If someone can clean it up and make it look good that would be great.
Thanks
Luc
One thing I find interesting, not that we know it matters yet, is the coils working together yet wound in the opposite direction. Could this be an ingredient that has not been looked into?
Not to go off topic, but to expand on it....
If you had the 2 coils on the core so that when you send power to the coils, that they oppose one another instead of both causing circular flux in the core. This may provide the same tension as the permanent mag provides the core in Lucs experiments. Just the thought of it in conventional circuitry would be a fault situation. But take it to resonance. It would be different if the coils were 1 in 1 wrapped over one another out of phase, but 2 separate coils opposing would be working that magnetic spring.
Itseung claim on embedded magnetic core IS what we are seeing here. Just he magnet is on the outside of the core instead of being internal to the core circuit.
He says it works, Jln says it works, I say luc has got it going on. =]
I have a large ferrite core that I had a hard time getting the 2 halves apart. It is a center core with 2 outer legs, traditional transformer style. About 2.25x2.25x.75 in. I dont remember what it came out of. But it has more mass than any of my toroids, which should lower the freq on that parameter alone.
I took it apart for ease of rewinding the plastic spool that slides on the center leg. Some of these ferrite cores of this style have a gap on the inner winding post. This one mates on all 3 surfaces.
So I figure just wind a core with 2 coils for some variability and try a no. of mags on it.
I
It funny, thinking about the resonance, my Orbonbon maybe has 2 resonant freq, one of the tcoil on the core and one for the pickup coil. So the mix might work very well if they were matched.
Mags
Quote from: Magluvin on March 17, 2010, 07:02:42 PM
One thing I find interesting, not that we know it matters yet, is the coils working together yet wound in the opposite direction. Could this be an ingredient that has not been looked into?
Mags
Yes Mags!!!
this is how this coil is wound. It could be the difference. I'll know after more testing if it is.
Luc
Quote from: gotoluc on March 17, 2010, 06:17:58 PM
Hi all,
please find attached circuit. If someone can clean it up and make it look good that would be great.
Thanks
Luc
Hi!
I will in Adobe illustrator. Give me an hour or so.
@gotoluc
After seeing your test #6 - Could you set the device up
so that the capacitor bank is going up at it's maximum
rate driven by the signal generator then clip the SG3525
circuit power to the capacitors without driving any FET so
that the SG circuit is using power....does the SG3525 circuit
pull down (swamp) all the voltage being gained or is there
still some gain - i.e. the voltage keep going up?
:S:MarkSCoffman
Quote from: HarryV on March 17, 2010, 07:27:36 PM
Hi!
I will in Adobe illustrator. Give me an hour or so.
Thanks Harry
Luc
Quote from: gotoluc on March 17, 2010, 05:11:15 PM
....
@Gyula, can you please explain how the 3vpp measured gate leak between the source and drain is capable of keeping the circuit running NOW at 30vdc, 57KHz with 50% duty cycle without using any current and maintaining 1.90vdc on the pickup coil with 49,850 Ohm load. Thank you for your help and time
Test 5 video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RhrYzBld74w
Test 6 video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UflGpzijWIA
Luc
Hi Luc,
I try to explain...
The drain source channel of the MOSFET is practically a short circuit for the ON time (actually the R
DS value of the IRF640, data sheet), the ON time now means half wave duration (earlier you used 18-20% or so duty cycle, this meant less ON time, more OFF time).
The drain source channel of the MOSFET is very high resistance for the OFF time, and both the output capacitance of the MOSFET and the body diode is in parallel with the drain source, the OFF time means the other half wave duration of the full pulse time. Now the output capacitance is about a few ten to a few hundred pF only, because the drain source voltage is much higher than earlier, up to 30V.
I still think the resonant tank LC circuit is formed by the output capacitance of the FET and from the 221mH (magnet-tuned) toroidal coil.
The FET as a switch pumps energy into the tank circuit from your generator and you have to consider not only the 3V peak to peak voltage but the current spikes shown in your earlier videos as flat lines between the spikes.
I think the input energy comes from these two: the 3V
pp and the spikes. The flat line between the spikes is explainable from the fact that the input is a square-wave: suddenly appears across the coil then its amplitude remains more or less constant, this means no or a very little flux change, then the square wave returns to zero, this also causes a flux change in the core again, current spike appears again.
So to estimate the real input power to the tank somehow those current spikes should be studied, I believe these maintain the voltage in the caps.
Resonant LC circuits have voltage 'amplification' properties, this depends on the loaded Q factor too. In you circuit this is modified a little, the normal Q times multiplier is not fully valid, due to the half wave rectification inside the tank.
If I can, I will address some unanswered questions tomorrow.
Thanks, Gyula
Quote from: gotoluc on March 17, 2010, 06:17:58 PM
Hi all,
please find attached circuit. If someone can clean it up and make it look good that would be great.
Thanks
Luc
Thanks for posting the diagram. This helps a lot. :)
One question: you write that the inductance is 1.04 mH. Is this correct ? Or did you mean 1.04 H ?
If the direction of winding is exactly as shown in the diagram, the two half-coils would generate opposing magnetic flux, and then the inductance would be theoretically 0.0 mH, or if the two half-coils are not exactly identical, it would be the difference. So maybe one has 500 mH and the other has 501.04 mH and the resulting difference is 1.04 mH. Maybe you could remove a few turns from one of the coils to get the resulting inductance exactly to zero.
But if this is the case, the whole thing gets even more bizzarre... but maybe for getting effects like overunity it has to be bizzarre... ;D
Quote from: mscoffman on March 17, 2010, 07:51:02 PM
@gotoluc
After seeing your test #6 - Could you set the device up
so that the capacitor bank is going up at it's maximum
rate driven by the signal generator then clip the SG3525
circuit power to the capacitors without driving any FET so
that the SG circuit is using power....does the SG3525 circuit
pull down (swamp) all the voltage being gained or is there
still some gain - i.e. the voltage keep going up?
:S:MarkSCoffman
Hi Mark and everyone,
at this time I'm not interested in a closed loop for a few reasons.
One is that an efficient pulse circuit could be made to use micro amps once we know the parameters needed. So trying to use the SG3525 or better, a CMOS version of the 555 still uses more current then a surface mount efficient pulse circuit.
The other reason is I still don't quite understand how this circuit works.
More testing is needed.
Luc
Quote from: skywatcher on March 17, 2010, 08:06:25 PM
Thanks for posting the diagram. This helps a lot. :)
One question: you write that the inductance is 1.04 mH. Is this correct ? Or did you mean 1.04 H ?
If the direction of winding is exactly as shown in the diagram, the two half-coils would generate opposing magnetic flux, and then the inductance would be theoretically 0.0 mH, or if the two half-coils are not exactly identical, it would be the difference. So maybe one has 500 mH and the other has 501.04 mH and the resulting difference is 1.04 mH. Maybe you could remove a few turns from one of the coils to get the resulting inductance exactly to zero.
But if this is the case, the whole thing gets even more bizzarre... but maybe for getting effects like overunity it has to be bizzarre... ;D
Hi skywatcher and everyone,
I think there is something special with this toroid but I still need to test it compared to another toroid. If I measure one half, it is exactly 260mh (both wound to be identical) and once they are combined it measures 1,043mH. When magnet is applied it will drop up to 1,000mH.
Luc
To whom ever it may interest. I received the below message by YouTube PM from user: energytruth's who I believe is OU user: PaulLowrance
Is this him?... if so, what's up with him ::)
Luc
Take it to University
A quick easy way to tell a faker is they refuse to take it to University or someplace and all they do is chant to theme, "Please build it. Just build it. Please build it!" So far you've encouraged people to build it, but have made no mention to you taking it to a University or anyplace to have it verified by professionals. If you're a faker to distract from the Steorn replications, you'll be caught one day. Promise You! There are methods you can't even begin to imagine. Getting compensated to lie and distract the public is against the LAW.
Quote from: gotoluc on March 17, 2010, 08:22:57 PM
Hi skywatcher and everyone,
I think there is something special with this toroid but I still need to test it compared to another toroid. If I measure one half, it is exactly 260mh (both wound to be identical) and once they are combined it measures 1,043mH. When magnet is applied it will drop up to 1,000mH.
Luc
This fits exactly to my explanation. If you combine the two halves, they cancel each other out and you see only a small difference because they are not exactly identical. It would be interesting what happens if you tune the two halves so that the difference is exactly zero. I think something should happen in this case. You may get more efficiency, or you may lose it completely.
It would also be interesting to make another coil (same core, same amount of wire) but with a normal winding.
Some cores are not ferrite, unless you purchased them and they are what they say. Some are conductive iron, like a big thick washer with a coating on them. If you scrape a bit of coating off, you will see shiny iron, or flat charcoal grey ferrite.
Mags
Im surprized TK didnt say to take it to a university. I know a couple others that would say so also.
But this is different. This person is almost threatening. But just keep going and ignore.
As far as Im concerned you are ahead of the orbo. ;]
Mags
Luc
"Take it to a university"
Is most definitely the mantra of Paul.
You should put that person on your ignore list at You tube.
This community recognizes you for the great researcher and humanitarian you are.
Don't let one sour note spoil your symphony.
Chet
@gotoluc
It is very simple. Your bucking mode wound but reverse connected coil is doing a double wammy.
When the first wound coil starts getting energized, it is already starting to impart to the core that already imparts to the the 2nd coil, and when the same discharge that hit the first coil now reaches the second coil that was actual precharged via the core, this then imparts to the core that imparts back to the 1st coil just before it gets hit again. 1st coil gets hit, imparts to second, then on top of that the 2nd gets hit then imparts to the first. So instead of doing the standard pulse one coil and draw off the other, when the charge finally leaves the coil, it had underwent a double hit on the core which forcibly translated to an added exchange to the output.
The best part of that is when you will one day wind a bucking primary over your existing very very nice thin 30 awg actual secondary. You then replace all the connections that went to your secondary to the new primary then feed off the secondary to send it also back to source. This should charge your battery. lol
Also, imagine instead of putting the five layers per coil then out of each, you make first layer first coil, then go to first layer second coil, then 2nd layer of first coil, then directly to second layer of second coil, all the way through the five layers. What would be the result? Why do I say that. Because of your loose winds, I don't think all five layers are required for that size toroid core but all five would be more useful as described successive mutual layers. That would be like a 10 wammy. I wonder if the result would be additive or compounded. Let's ask a banker. lol
I really like what you do @gotoluc , very inspiring, so please keep on digging it up.
So much fun.
Quote from: gotoluc on March 17, 2010, 07:56:42 PM
Thanks Harry
Luc
Here it is as a jpg and pdf
Let me know if it is ok.
Harry
Quote from: wattsup on March 17, 2010, 09:46:14 PM
@gotoluc
It is very simple. Your bucking mode wound but reverse connected coil is doing a double wammy.
When the first wound coil starts getting energized, it is already starting to impart to the core that already imparts to the the 2nd coil, and when the same discharge that hit the first coil now reaches the second coil that was actual precharged via the core, this then imparts to the core that imparts back to the 1st coil just before it gets hit again. 1st coil gets hit, imparts to second, then on top of that the 2nd gets hit then imparts to the first. So instead of doing the standard pulse one coil and draw off the other, when the charge finally leaves the coil, it had underwent a double hit on the core which forcibly translated to an added exchange to the output.
The best part of that is when you will one day wind a bucking primary over your existing very very nice thin 30 awg actual secondary. You then replace all the connections that went to your secondary to the new primary then feed off the secondary to send it also back to source. This should charge your battery. lol
Also, imagine instead of putting the five layers per coil then out of each, you make first layer first coil, then go to first layer second coil, then 2nd layer of first coil, then directly to second layer of second coil, all the way through the five layers. What would be the result? Why do I say that. Because of your loose winds, I don't think all five layers are required for that size toroid core but all five would be more useful as described successive mutual layers. That would be like a 10 wammy. I wonder if the result would be additive or compounded. Let's ask a banker. lol
I really like what you do @gotoluc , very inspiring, so please keep on digging it up.
So much fun.
Hi wattsup,
yes!!! so much fun and so much left to test.
Thanks for your input. I like the flip flop layers. That is on the list to test. Believe it or not I also had the same idea. We can go out to town on this one ;D
See my next post.
Luc
Harryv
You will have to recheck the way the coil is wound. It wasnt a typo on the drawing. =]
Where the coil ends meet, both will be coming out of the core from the inside of the core.
Mags
Hi folks, sorry for having same name almost skywatcher, but i have it in the other forum.
hi luc, this reminds me of an invention in an older pdf i think from panacea, heres the pics.
peace love light
Tyson :)
Hi Everyone,
as you may of noticed in my test 5 video I do have a second toroid. It also has 2 separate half windings but both windings continue the same way. I wound that one in purpose to compare it the the fist one (windings opposed)
I wound it with the same wire and also wound 6 layers per side to get a higher Inductance. I was very surprised when I connected my Inductance meter and found each coil to be only 220mH compared to the first one at 260mH. I was even more surprised when I combined the coils and it is only 890mH :-\... compared to 1,043mH from the first one.
I don't understand that one ???... more wire, same core but less inductance!
VERY IMPORTANT NEWS
I just finished testing that second coil (both wires going the same direction) and I can't get it to do what the first coil does (send back energy)
The best I got was at 15vdc at 28ma. I tried everything I know to date and this one does not do it.
I think this would be important for replicator to know.
Luc
Quote from: HarryV on March 17, 2010, 10:33:46 PM
Here it is as a jpg and pdf
Let me know if it is ok.
Harry
Excellent work Harry ;)
Thank you very much for the great job :)
I'm looking it over and will let you know of any add ons or changes.
Luc
Okay Harry,
here is the add on:
Add (With magnet aprox. 1/8" air gap) and (With magnet aprox. 1/16" air gap) See attached
And like Mags says, both coil sides start and end the same way. This maybe the most important point as so far this is the only coil that works.
Thanks
Luc
Edited & Compacted
Quote from: gotoluc on March 17, 2010, 11:17:33 PM
Okay Harry,
here is the add on:
Add (With magnet aprox. 1/8" air gap) and (With magnet aprox. 1/16" air gap) See attached
And like Mags says, both coil sides start and end the same way. This maybe the most important point as so far this is the only coil that works.
Thanks
Luc
And the 24 mm should be .24 mm? (actually .255 including dielectric layer?).
@Luc, could you maybe find out the fabric/type of the core, and maybe give a 2 digit value for the coil resistance e.g: 6.9x Ohm.
It's a very clean and simple circuit !
--
NextGen67
@Luc,
You mention in the video that while the Cap is charging, you constantly need to re-adjust the frequency of the generator slightly. That means the Cap is influencing the coil behavior... Is there a way to collect the energy in the Cap, but exclude the cap from the from the rest of the circuit? Or just try to place the cap (or another one) at a different place in the circuit and by such avoid any possible leaking at all ? Maybe a simple diode could allow a one way only energy direction to the Cap.
--
NextGen67
Alright fellers
I did a quick coil wind on the ferrite transformer.
Some things I need to do is revise my 556 to separate freq and pulse width. Im going to set it up on a solder bread board.
My setup was a bit different as I used 1 12v bat for the timer and drive. I have a 5600 uf 50v cap at the drive branch of the 12v bat. Im using a 100ohm res to deliver the 12v to the cap. This allows me to see more resolution the draw on the cap is as I fiddle, instead of watching for the least draw from the batt, again, as I fiddle, and when it goes up above the 12v bat, then remove the resistor and she goes. Its a good feeling to see it.
Above 15v. And for a 5600uf, is was a good rise. It didnt take long to fiddle it. =] And it was an audible freq above 10k.
I am going to clear out the work tables and get this 556 straight, wind a couple coils that I can interchange on the core and do a couple vids. I looked up some sites that have some sweet 2 piece cores. Makes winding a breeze, and the outer core legs can be wound for pickups for some simple variety.
Luc the strange inductance reading may be to the opposing coils or how they are oppositely wound.
And it doesnt seem to be a requirement to wind the coil that way. But those should be studied all the same to narrow things down. If you had not wound it that way, who knows how long it would have been before someone did. ;]
Mags
I am a layman when it comes to this sort of thing, so please don't take my remark the wrong way. But this is not very impressive, not when you have a signal generator that is hooked to the mains as part of the circuit. That is even worse than when you had a pulsing circuit run by a 9v battery.
If you cannot or will not take the output and run it into the input, so that you have closed the loop, the only thing I can think of is that the 9v battery, or the mains, is powering the device.
Not one free energy demonstrator ever tries to close the loop - there is always a reason not to. If you really believe you have an anomaly, you should try to close the loop.
Otherwise, all you are doing, it looks like, is broadcasting radio waves all over the place and indirectly charging the capacitors from them, with the power ultimately coming from the mains or the 9v battery, depending on whether you are using the signal generator or the pulse circuit.
canam
well this project is relatively new. Things are still being questioned by everyone. Believe it or not, some do try to close the loop but in most cases we fiddle and try again.
The timer circuits actually use a bit of power. It seems to be a barrier here for now. Or until the output gets better, and its only been a few days.
But I can tell ya, when you take the battery off of that cap and that oscillator coil just keeps on a singin, you get a chill down your back. =]
Not all that play with this stuff are as you claim. So get some wire and start makin some coils. =]
Mags
Correction 2 posts above, the resistor sending the 12v to the cap is 560 ohm. =]
Magsâ™
Quote from: gotoluc on March 17, 2010, 11:17:33 PM
Okay Harry,
here is the add on:
Add (With magnet aprox. 1/8" air gap) and (With magnet aprox. 1/16" air gap) See attached
And like Mags says, both coil sides start and end the same way. This maybe the most important point as so far this is the only coil that works.
Thanks
Luc
Hi Luc,
To clarify the two coils winding details even better, let me say:
The start of the left hand side coil is at the 11:30 clock position and its end is at 6:30 ,ok?
The start of the right hand side coil is at the 5:30 clock position and its end is at 12:30 ,ok?
AND both coils start by going UNDER the core first, ok? (AS shown by you and by HarryV too.)
HOWEVER on the schematic made by member mrock (Reply #92) the start of left hand side coil is drawn as going OVER the core first, not UNDER the core.
WHICH IS CORRECT?
Thanks, Gyula
Quote from: mrock on March 18, 2010, 12:37:59 AM
Edited & Compacted
Thank you mrock for making the changes.
Luc
Quote from: NextGen67 on March 18, 2010, 12:39:52 AM
And the 24 mm should be .24 mm? (actually .255 including dielectric layer?)
NextGen67
Yes NextGen67, you are right!
@mrock can you change it to 0.25mm instead of the 24mm
Thanks
Luc
Quote from: gotoluc on March 17, 2010, 08:31:23 PM
To whom ever it may interest. I received the below message by
YouTube PM from user: energytruth's who I believe is OU user:
PaulLowrance
Is this him?... if so, what's up with him ::)
Luc
Take it to University
A quick easy way to tell a faker is they refuse to take it to University or
someplace and all they do is chant to theme, "Please build it. Just build it.
Please build it!" So far you've encouraged people to build it, but have made
no mention to you taking it to a University or anyplace to have it verified by
professionals. If you're a faker to distract from the Steorn replications, you'll
be caught one day. Promise You! There are methods you can't even begin to
imagine. Getting compensated to lie and distract the public is against the LAW.
@gotoluc
If you want, you can go to his blog and ask him what he means.
He is doing some very advanced technical stuff himself.
http://globalfreeenergy.info/
I'll tell you, I expect he'll deny he sent this. Mainly cause it makes
no sense. ;). He seems to be a very smart guy but he has said some
emotional driven things in the past. He also seems to have a relatively
intense adverse hacker following that damages his web site etc.
And they are taking stuff he said previously and broadcasting it...So
please, if you will, don't add to it.
---
gotoluc; it's important that you don't listen to adverse things sent in
the way of the above message. You are contributing greatly to the
general knowledge level with your videos of hands-on experiments
...Force anyone else of them come here and be reasonable!
---
By the way, let those who want to patent motors with no outputs
do that all they want...they are the ones that are their wasting
time. Who first uses scientific and engineering principles?
:S:MarkSCoffman
Quote from: NextGen67 on March 18, 2010, 01:55:06 AM
@Luc,
You mention in the video that while the Cap is charging, you constantly need to re-adjust the frequency of the generator slightly. That means the Cap is influencing the coil behavior... Is there a way to collect the energy in the Cap, but exclude the cap from the from the rest of the circuit? Or just try to place the cap (or another one) at a different place in the circuit and by such avoid any possible leaking at all ? Maybe a simple diode could allow a one way only energy direction to the Cap.
--
NextGen67
If a variable resistance is added on the cap bank and the resistance raised to the point where the voltage does not climb or go down then no adjustments would be needed.
Luc
Quote from: gotoluc on March 17, 2010, 05:11:15 PM
Hi everyone,
I took some time off today to do some more experiments as I can't stop thinking about this setup and I'm sure that goes for many of you.
I made 2 new video's to which I hope will answer some questions and help understand the effect.
Sorry I can't answer individual questions. I rather use the limited time I have to continue experimenting and posting videos that will hopefully cover everything one would need to make a successful replication.
@Gyula, can you please explain how the 3vpp measured gate leak between the source and drain is capable of keeping the circuit running NOW at 30vdc, 57KHz with 50% duty cycle without using any current and maintaining 1.90vdc on the pickup coil with 49,850 Ohm load. Thank you for your help and time
Test 5 video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RhrYzBld74w
Test 6 video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UflGpzijWIA
Luc
Hi gotoluc,
In searching for explanations, there could be another remote possibility, may I suggest the following very simple test?
Remove the probes of the two mutlimeters that continuously monitor the voltage and current of the capacitor(s).
And then, only measure the voltage/current momentarily at some time intervals eg every 10 or more minutes to see if the voltage still rises.
IIRC There was another thread, I think Ossie’s motor, or orbo replications, where it appeared that a trickle current from the continuously hooked up voltmeter was back charging the source battery…
Btw what are the batteries used in those two meters? Are they 9V a piece?
Great work and thought process on your setup
Thanks for posting.
Mike
Quote from: gyulasun on March 18, 2010, 10:38:12 AM
Hi Luc,
To clarify the two coils winding details even better, let me say:
The start of the left hand side coil is at the 11:30 clock position and its end is at 6:30 ,ok?
The start of the right hand side coil is at the 5:30 clock position and its end is at 12:30 ,ok?
AND both coils start by going UNDER the core first, ok? (AS shown by you and by HarryV too.)
HOWEVER on the schematic made by member mrock (Reply #92) the start of left hand side coil is drawn as going OVER the core first, not UNDER the core.
WHICH IS CORRECT?
Thanks, Gyula
Hi Gyula,
the changes made by mrock are correct! as I asked for these changes.
Please see this post as this maybe important until proven otherwise: http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=8892.msg233097#msg233097
Luc
Quote from: mikestocks2006 on March 18, 2010, 11:05:23 AM
Hi gotoluc,
In searching for explanations, there could be another remote possibility, may I suggest the following very simple test?
Remove the probes of the two mutlimeters that continuously monitor the voltage and current of the capacitor(s).
And then, only measure the voltage/current momentarily at some time intervals eg every 10 or more minutes to see if the voltage still rises.
IIRC There was another thread, I think Ossie’s motor, or orbo replications, where it appeared that a trickle current from the continuously hooked up voltmeter was back charging the source battery…
Btw what are the batteries used in those two meters? Are they 9V a piece?
Great work and thought process on your setup
Thanks for posting.
Mike
Hi Mike,
I know this kind of thing can happen and that was tested before I started this topic.
So it was tested with no meters or probes attached and it did the same.
My meters on the cap bank use 9v batteries.
Thanks for pointing out this possible problem.
Luc
@mrock can you change it to 0.25mm instead of the 24mm
Thanks
Luc
[/quote]
Hi Luc,
Changes made, Re-posted Reply #92, is this correct.
thanks,
mike
Quote from: mrock on March 18, 2010, 11:33:04 AM
@mrock can you change it to 0.25mm instead of the 24mm
Thanks
Luc
Hi Luc,
Changes made, Re-posted Reply #92, is this correct.
thanks,
mike
Yes Mike, this is the correct change.
Thanks for your time.
Luc
Quote from: gotoluc on March 17, 2010, 08:09:46 PM
Hi Mark and everyone,
at this time I'm not interested in a closed loop for a few reasons.
One is that an efficient pulse circuit could be made to use micro amps once
we know the parameters needed. So trying to use the SG3525 or better, a
CMOS version of the 555 still uses more current then a surface mount
efficient pulse circuit.
The other reason is I still don't quite understand how this circuit works.
More testing is needed.
Luc
While what the toroid and coil is doing is interesting and ultimately
theoretically complicated I think using to an overunity operating
circuit to probe the overunity energy field itself would prove more
productive.
:S:MarkSCoffman
Quote from: canam101 on March 18, 2010, 08:04:37 AM
I am a layman when it comes to this sort of thing, so please don't take my
remark the wrong way. But this is not very impressive, not when you have a
signal generator that is hooked to the mains as part of the circuit. That is
even worse than when you had a pulsing circuit run by a 9v battery.
If you cannot or will not take the output and run it into the input, so that you
have closed the loop, the only thing I can think of is that the 9v battery, or
the mains, is powering the device.
Not one free energy demonstrator ever tries to close the loop - there is
always a reason not to. If you really believe you have an anomaly, you
should try to close the loop.
Otherwise, all you are doing, it looks like, is broadcasting radio waves all over
the place and indirectly charging the capacitors from them, with the power
ultimately coming from the mains or the 9v battery, depending on whether
you are using the signal generator or the pulse circuit.
@canam101
You are a man after my own heart. You are absolutely correct about this
and it p*sses me off greatly. I think it's invalid and indirectly supports
the MIB's.
I do think this circuit is demonstrating overunity. I am withholding my opinion
on where this overunity energy comes from, for now...but we need devices
that clearly demonstrate it...so we can learn what to do with them.
Transistors, both Fets and Bipolars, both types need energy applied to
their gates and bases respectively to function. How much energy varies
with transistor types. Fets use AC energy through their internal (parasitic)
capacitance as listed on their manufactures specification sheets. Bipolar
transistors use energy both through their base currents(@voltage=power)
and AC through their internal parasitic capacitances (lower then Fets)
So at the very least, transistors will use energy for their internal operation
taken from the signal generator. At worst they can (and are configured
that way) to rectify and gate additional power into the circuit.
So while the circuit seems to be overunity we are left lacking proof.
The optoisolator circuit of previous Naudin links in this thread, causes
the transistor to get it's gate power, not from the signal generator,
but from the bulk capacitors, so using it and still having the voltage
climb on the capacitors would demonstrate that the circuit still has
overunity gain while also supplying all of it's own internal energy needs.
Once that is proven that can, only a few microwatts of signal
would be required additionally drawn to generate the required
clock. Probably by relocating the circuits hot frequency to
32.768KHz or /2 to 16.KHz or other submultiples thereof.
Since fet drive is tricky the whole thing could be able to be done
using the SG3525 circuit at a marginal cost of additional power.
We don't know whether the excess energy gain can support that
circuit.
Finally, it is possible to cut the required energy drawn by the
output transistor by reconfiguring the circuit to an emitter
coupled amplifier configuration. In this way both the collector
current plus the base current drives the coil (to ground) and
losses will be minimised. Alternately, connecting the Fet in
between the two coil windings and reusing the gate coupled
AC drive current might do the same thing.
I hoping that at least experimenter Magluvin will not succumb to
this overunitiphobia and will duplicate this circuit in a way that
we can progress. Once we get over this, we can design the output
according to standard engineering principles for optimal circuit
efficiency and maximize the overunity effect.
:S:MarkSCoffman
Quote from: mrock on March 18, 2010, 11:33:04 AM
@mrock can you change it to 0.25mm instead of the 24mm
Thanks
Luc
Hi Luc,
Changes made, Re-posted Reply #92, is this correct.
thanks,
mike
Hi Mike,
I decided to take the coil off the block of wood it was hot glued on to make sure of the wire direction and connection. I noticed the wires are a little different, so can you make the changes I made just in case any of this plays a important part. I also added where the wires start when winding.
The attached is the correct way. Sorry for the changes again.
Thanks
Luc
Quote from: mscoffman on March 18, 2010, 12:14:17 PM
I do think this circuit is demonstrating overunity. I am withholding my opinion
on where this overunity energy comes from, for now...but we need devices
that clearly demonstrate it...so we can learn what to do with them.
Just looking at it from a layman's point of view, if I had such a circuit, and it looked like it was OU, the first thing I would do is to try to close the loop. If it stopped working when I tried it, it would at least get me working in a direction that would let me look at the reason for not being able to close the loop.
If it did close the loop, then after I got over my astonishment, I could try to find out what non-OU reason would allow me to close the loop. And it would be a hell of an incentive for everyone else to replicate what I had.
Either way, trying to close the loop would be very useful.
That may be a naive layman's view of it, but it is the reason I cannot understand why Luc doesn't even try to do this.
Quote from: canam101 on March 18, 2010, 12:53:57 PM
Just looking at it from a layman's point of view, if I had such a circuit, and it looked like it was OU, the first thing I would do is to try to close the loop. If it stopped working when I tried it, it would at least get me working in a direction that would let me look at the reason for not being able to close the loop.
If it did close the loop, then after I got over my astonishment, I could try to find out what non-OU reason would allow me to close the loop. And it would be a hell of an incentive for everyone else to replicate what I had.
Either way, trying to close the loop would be very useful.
That may be a naive layman's view of it, but it is the reason I cannot understand why Luc doesn't even try to do this.
@canam101
Well, I think because each individual has his own way of working... I thought he explained already what was his personal reason?
My personal opinion is well, give him the time he need, after all *he* is the one doing the work, and kind enough to report and give questions and remarks.
Of course I am as curious as you :) So you might want to give it a try to replicate and close the loop.
Tough, at this stage I think it is better indeed to analyze what is going on, and see to find why is is behaving as it does now. In time I will replicate his circuit also, whether is proves out to be AE or not [AE=Additional Energy].
Ok, lets get back to help Luc with his work where possible... He put in his nightly hours for it ;)
--
NextGen67
Quote from: gotoluc on March 18, 2010, 12:36:30 PM
....
The attached is the correct way. Sorry for the changes again.
Thanks
Luc
Hi Luc,
Thanks for the corrections. I found: the way you eventually wind the coils is known as the common mode choke coils EXCEPT you connect them in series. (By the way, here is some common mode choke coils, widely used at the mains voltage input of most power supplies etc:
http://www.tdk.co.jp/tefe02/e93_tf.pdf ).
The fact your no magnet coil inductance is around 1 Henry and with the magnets it goes down to as low as 23mH to 200mH shows saturation and would be interesting to know that the switching current from the FET makes the core towards more saturation or brings it to a less saturated point on the core's B-H curve? Whenever you have time for a quick check: simply replace the two crocodile clips on the coil contacts with each other, to change the current flow's direction in the coil and see how the circuit behaves.
Also, in another test, could you shift the position of the magnets from the vertical symmetry line in the schematic to the left or to the right and see if this has any effect?
Sorry if my explanation was not understandable, now the coil wireing issue may bring us further ahead.
Thanks, Gyula
Quote from: canam101 on March 18, 2010, 12:53:57 PM
Just looking at it from a layman's point of view, if I had such a circuit, and it looked like it was OU, the first thing I would do is to try to close the loop. If it stopped working when I tried it, it would at least get me working in a direction that would let me look at the reason for not being able to close the loop.
If it did close the loop, then after I got over my astonishment, I could try to find out what non-OU reason would allow me to close the loop. And it would be a hell of an incentive for everyone else to replicate what I had.
Either way, trying to close the loop would be very useful.
That may be a naive layman's view of it, but it is the reason I cannot understand why Luc doesn't even try to do this.
Hi canam101,
I personally would be surprised that the circuit (posted above) on its own would be OU
However, if we are able to make a Toroid with a magnet Resonate at next to no cost of energy since even the possible gate switching energy is being returned to the capacitor bank, then this is good.
What you and others who are not replicating may not be considering is that a pickup coil can added and real current can be extracted at no cost to the capacitor bank returned input energy.
This is where the possible OU or Free energy could be coming from. My tests so far show that when I add a load to the pickup coil it has no reverse effect on the input. JLN has demonstrated this also but he does not have his input at zero yet!
Also, there could be a possibility of multiple pickup coils added as the toroid seems to have an opposite field on each half and maybe on each side. So there could be 4 pickup coils. The other thing is the pickup coil I used is not tuned so it is not taking full advantage of the potential magnetic current.
Luc
@gotoluc
Thanks for the reply.
Quote from: gyulasun on March 18, 2010, 01:20:21 PM
Hi Luc,
Thanks for the corrections. I found: the way you eventually wind the coils is known as the common mode choke coils EXCEPT you connect them in series. (By the way, here is some common mode choke coils, widely used at the mains voltage input of most power supplies etc:
http://www.tdk.co.jp/tefe02/e93_tf.pdf ).
The fact your no magnet coil inductance is around 1 Henry and with the magnets it goes down to as low as 23mH to 200mH shows saturation and would be interesting to know that the switching current from the FET makes the core towards more saturation or brings it to a less saturated point on the core's B-H curve? Whenever you have time for a quick check: simply replace the two crocodile clips on the coil contacts with each other, to change the current flow's direction in the coil and see how the circuit behaves.
Also, in another test, could you shift the position of the magnets from the vertical symmetry line in the schematic to the left or to the right and see if this has any effect?
Sorry if my explanation was not understandable, now the coil wireing issue may bring us further ahead.
Thanks, Gyula
Hi Gyula,
thanks for your explanations so far. I don't always understand them completely but they do help but they could be important to others who are looking at this topic. So please don't stop as I'm sure it is appreciated.
Switching the polarities is something that I have done a while back and the coil does behave differently. The effect is best with the coil as the UPDATED coil I posted above.
I have also moved the magnet around. This effects it much less but that could be because there is only one pickup coil. What I forgot to demonstrate in my videos is with the magnet on the center of the coils if I move the pickup coil from the below half to the above half the sine wave on the scope flips around. My last test last night I added a pickup coil on the top half and was able to also collect energy without affecting the lower coil or the input returned energy.
There could be a possibility of pickup coils on the other side of the toroid also.
Luc
ADDED:Could you help with the tuning of the pickup coils. As I noticed a difference, as one that was working well will no longer when I change the frequency and another coil will start to work better. I don't know enough to make an idea coil for a certain frequency.
Quote from: gotoluc on March 18, 2010, 01:23:54 PM
Hi canam101,
I personally would be surprised that the circuit (posted above) on its own would be OU
However, if we are able to make a Toroid with a magnet Resonate at next to no cost of energy since even the possible gate switching energy is being returned to the capacitor bank, then this is good.
What you and others who are not replicating may not be considering is that a pickup coil can added and real current can be extracted at no cost to the capacitor bank returned input energy.
This is where the possible OU or Free energy could be coming from. My tests so far show that when I add a load to the pickup coil it has no reverse effect on the input. JLN has demonstrated this also but he does not have his input at zero yet!
Also, there could be a possibility of multiple pickup coils added as the toroid seems to have an opposite field on each half and maybe on each side. So there could be 4 pickup coils. The other thing is the pickup coil I used is not tuned so it is not taking full advantage of the potential magnetic current.
Luc
Hi Luc,
Exactly what I noticed also. And the even better thing is, that *might* such happen, It does in no single way 'break' any law or interference with CoE.
It is just the Bloch Wall domains receiving an 'extra' kick from the magnet that is sitting there. At the end of the pulse, these domains will be 'shaken' for a while -at a rather high frequency- and the energy released from the *motion* of these domains *do* exit the coil.
Your pickup coil is collecting these, and as you mentioned before, most if not all the supplied energy put in the coil comes back in the Cap.
What is basically happening is that instead the magnet is moving, the domains inside the core do 'move', and by such cause [in combination with the magnet] an extra -short moment- of Additional Energy.
--
NextGen67
Quote from: Magluvin on March 17, 2010, 07:02:42 PM
One thing I find interesting, not that we know it matters yet, is the coils working together yet wound in the opposite direction. Could this be an ingredient that has not been looked into?
Not to go off topic, but to expand on it....
If you had the 2 coils on the core so that when you send power to the coils, that they oppose one another instead of both causing circular flux in the core. This may provide the same tension as the permanent mag provides the core in Lucs experiments. Just the thought of it in conventional circuitry would be a fault situation. But take it to resonance. It would be different if the coils were 1 in 1 wrapped over one another out of phase, but 2 separate coils opposing would be working that magnetic spring.
Itseung claim on embedded magnetic core IS what we are seeing here. Just he magnet is on the outside of the core instead of being internal to the core circuit.
He says it works, Jln says it works, I say luc has got it going on. =]
---------------------------------------------------
Hi all,
I second the motion! (above)
When Luc first described the coil winding, I thought that this is a
unique coil configuration.
Such a coil configuration would never enter the minds of a conventional engineers ... it is contrary, a fault. Placing a PM in the orientation as Luc's is alien to me considering the Orbo inductance demo has the magnet and core axis' coaxially arranged (I know ... probably not the same effect).
Another Xbehavior is that the best power pickup is at the 'head-on' position where the windings meet.
Has the same setup (magnet and all) been tried using conventional toroid winding?
Later,
Greg
Quote from: gotoluc on March 18, 2010, 01:46:43 PM
....
I have also moved the magnet around. This effects it much less but that could be because there is only one pickup coil. What I forgot to demonstrate in my videos is with the magnet on the center of the coils if I move the pickup coil from the below half to the above half the sine wave on the scope flips around. My last test last night I added a pickup coil on the top half and was able to also collect energy without affecting the lower coil or the input returned energy.
There could be a possibility of pickup coils on the other side of the toroid also.
ADDED:
Could you help with the tuning of the pickup coils. As I noticed a difference, as one that was working well will no longer when I change the frequency and another coil will start to work better. I don't know enough to make an idea coil for a certain frequency.
Hi Luc,
Ok on you findings. I think first thing would be to explore the volume of the magnetic field coming out from the toroid, I mean to probe around the toroid with a max 1-1.5cm OD short solenoid coil (no more than 50-60 turns) and use your Fluke multidigit meter in AC to see the induced voltage and find where and how the position of the probe coil gives the highest amplitude and how it changes with going away from the toroid.
I say this first because I think the pickup coil you showed in your videos is a bit long for the job. (I think you chose that just to see the behavior.)
Also the copper wire resistance ought to be the smaller the better because of using 15-20 Ohm coils will waste induced power when loaded. Unfortunately, this requirement involves using thicker wire for the pickup coils, and this makes them a bit bulkier.
I wonder if these pickup coils could be used with ferromagnetic cores? It would be worth trying because it would tremendously increase the pickup coils inductance, hence the induced output power.
Once you explored the best places for positioning the pickups, then try to make or obtain multiturn coils that OD / length ratio is between 2 - 3 or so.
I know you are aware of Brooks coils, of course this is not an ultimate requirement now. Much more important is to test a pickup with soft iron core included to see if the lack of action-reaction still holds to the toroid.
Finally when you have some pickup coils around the toroid, and you connect them either in series or parallel (to increase output current or voltage (but not both of course)) you may wish to measure the combined inductance with your L meter and then find a capacitor that makes them resonant at the output frequency. This capacitor ought to be connected in series with one of the common coil outputs and then would come the load.
(You may consider using audio crossover air cored coils for the pickups if you do not have to time or means now for making some multiturn coils. Unfortunately, they are not the cheapest components.)
rgds, Gyula
@gotoluc
That is the right way my man. Get to unity, only then think beyond.
You can have minimum 4 pickup coils. The best position is never perfectly centered, but the center of the pick up coil onto the core of the toroid. You can see alot of those tests done on my videos showing the effect in many ways.
Hi everyone,
thanks for all your interest, suggestions and encouragement.
I made a new video in hope it will help replicators to better understand how to tweak the signal generator for the Toroid coil to send back the most current. I also measured the current going to the gate using my scope probe across a carbon 100 Ohm resistor. The below scope shots are the results.
Link to video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-pkRBe0dpa8
Luc
First scope shot is when the coil is at the neutral point (no current used)
The second shot is when it is tweaked to send most current back. One can clearly see that less current is used when sending back the most current. This is difficult for me to understand ???
Quote from: NextGen67 on March 18, 2010, 01:57:37 PM
Hi Luc,
Exactly what I noticed also. And the even better thing is, that *might* such happen, It does in no single way 'break' any law or interference with CoE.
It is just the Bloch Wall domains receiving an 'extra' kick from the magnet that is sitting there. At the end of the pulse, these domains will be 'shaken' for a while -at a rather high frequency- and the energy released from the *motion* of these domains *do* exit the coil.
Your pickup coil is collecting these, and as you mentioned before, most if not all the supplied energy put in the coil comes back in the Cap.
What is basically happening is that instead the magnet is moving, the domains inside the core do 'move', and by such cause [in combination with the magnet] an extra -short moment- of Additional Energy.
--
NextGen67
The magnets could be moving, or rather vibrating, but with an amplitude which is too small for you to see (or perhaps even feel?).
I agree HarryV this could be happening. At frequencies of 30KHz and over, movement would not be detectable.
Luc
Hi everyone,
Please forgive me for asking this here but it's just as good a place as any.
I sold almost everything late last year 'cause o' tha 'conomy. That included my Tektronix scope. Now I need a scope but I'm computer 'rich; at the moment. I have been looking at PC Oscilloscopes online and think this is the way to go.
I found this for US $300.00:
http://www.allspectrum.com/store/product_info.php?cPath=22&products_id=2778&osCsid=329f8a4810af600caa31be6ba1a2b3b2&sdesc=USB+PC+OSCILLOSCOPE+%2B+FUNCTION+GENERATOR%2C+2+Channel+%3D%3DNEW%3D%3D+Model+%23+PCSGU250
It also has a function generator. I've been looking for a 'catch' like "... Does not include $10,000 software license" or something. Can't find it. So what do you think? Any experiences / recommendations?
Thanks,
Greg
Luc, could you go over how you wound your coil in more detail. You indicated it was very important, so anyone wanting to replicate or comfirm your results may need to be sure they wind it the way you have. I had to order some 24 AWG wire so I would have the same as yours. Where did you get your cores? Thanks
Bill
Hi All,
a new video is available now.
Link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sbgwlJx0zNw
Luc
Luc,
Sorry I do not understand where exactly is the 100 Ohm carbon resistor:
in series with the source electrode of the FET?
Gyula
EDIT: Ok now I figured out it is in series with the GND clip coming from the signal gen.
Quote from: gmeast on March 18, 2010, 06:25:04 PM
Hi everyone,
Please forgive me for asking this here but it's just as good a place as any.
I sold almost everything late last year 'cause o' tha 'conomy. That included my Tektronix scope. Now I need a scope but I'm computer 'rich; at the moment. I have been looking at PC Oscilloscopes online and think this is the way to go.
I found this for US $300.00:
http://www.allspectrum.com/store/product_info.php?cPath=22&products_id=2778&osCsid=329f8a4810af600caa31be6ba1a2b3b2&sdesc=USB+PC+OSCILLOSCOPE+%2B+FUNCTION+GENERATOR%2C+2+Channel+%3D%3DNEW%3D%3D+Model+%23+PCSGU250
It also has a function generator. I've been looking for a 'catch' like "... Does not include $10,000 software license" or something. Can't find it. So what do you think? Any experiences / recommendations?
Thanks,
Greg
Hi Greg,
I would recommend this one: http://cgi.ebay.com/Hantek-DSO-2090-PC-USB-Digital-Oscilloscope-100MS_W0QQitemZ280446263098QQcmdZViewItemQQptZBI_Oscilloscopes?hash=item414be65f3a
40MHz with software included and spectrum analyzer $179. delivered to your door.
I used this scope for years now. Best value I ever got for the money.
They also have this generator: http://cgi.ebay.com/PC-USB-Arbitrary-Waveform-Generator-Function-SALE-NIB-A_W0QQitemZ140385695694QQcmdZViewItemQQptZBI_Signal_Sources?hash=item20afa3b7ce
$153. delivered
Or this high end one if you need the options: http://cgi.ebay.com/Digital-USB-Arbitrary-Waveform-Generator-Counter-2-7GHz_W0QQitemZ140385457576QQcmdZViewItemQQptZBI_Signal_Sources?hash=item20afa015a8
Hope this helps.
Luc
Good vid. I would not worry about proving anything further on that matter. =]
Was thinking if another resonant circuit could be inserted that will drive the fet. As in if you start it with the sig gen, than remove the sig gen and the second resonant circuit could keep the fet pulsing. Or some sort of delayed feedback from the oscillator to trip the fet.
I see you are at 24v now. It must have climbed quick in that short of time and rested at 24v.
Also another solution would be to get a JT to pulse the fet. It will probably use less than the 555 or SG chip circuit. MK1 could probably suggest a lil kicker for ya.
And the jt bat would surely enjoy sipping on the cap. =]
Mags
@Luc:
Today i made a toroidal coil, based on your schematic.
My ferrite core has a inner diameter of 23 mm and outer diameter of 35 mm.
I used 0.4 mm wire, only one layer.
The half-winding A-C has 81.2 mH, the half-winding B-D has 81.3 mH.
If i connect B to C as in your schematic and measure at A and D, i get 315 mH.
That's according to the theory, because the number of turns has a quadratic effect on the inductance.
But it's not the difference as in your example. ???
The difference (0.34 mH) i get when i connect A to B and measure at C and D.
I think there are some inconsistencies in your schematic. Maybe you can check it again...
Quote from: Magluvin on March 18, 2010, 08:10:31 PM
Good vid. I would not worry about proving anything further on that matter. =]
Was thinking if another resonant circuit could be inserted that will drive the fet. As in if you start it with the sig gen, than remove the sig gen and the second resonant circuit could keep the fet pulsing. Or some sort of delayed feedback from the oscillator to trip the fet.
I see you are at 24v now. It must have climbed quick in that short of time and rested at 24v.
Also another solution would be to get a JT to pulse the fet. It will probably use less than the 555 or SG chip circuit. MK1 could probably suggest a lil kicker for ya.
And the jt bat would surely enjoy sipping on the cap. =]
Mags
Yes that is the last ;)
I can get it to 30vdc if I re-tune it.
On with the real work.
Luc
Quote from: skywatcher on March 18, 2010, 08:33:36 PM
@Luc:
Today i made a toroidal coil, based on your schematic.
My ferrite core has a inner diameter of 23 mm and outer diameter of 35 mm.
I used 0.4 mm wire, only one layer.
The half-winding A-C has 81.2 mH, the half-winding B-D has 81.3 mH.
If i connect B to C as in your schematic and measure at A and D, i get 315 mH.
That's according to the theory, because the number of turns has a quadratic effect on the inductance.
But it's not the difference as in your example. ???
The difference (0.34 mH) i get when i connect A to B and measure at C and D.
I think there are some inconsistencies in your schematic. Maybe you can check it again...
skywatcher,
did you not see the previous page where I posted the new circuit with the correct way for connections. What you posted was a quick hand drawing I did.
Please read all the posts to stay up to date.
Circuit posted here: http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=8892.msg233190#msg233190
Luc
Quote from: gotoluc on March 18, 2010, 09:02:04 PM
skywatcher,
did you not see the previous page where I posted the new circuit with the correct way for connections. What you posted was a quick hand drawing I did.
Please read all the posts to stay up to date.
Circuit posted here: http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=8892.msg233190#msg233190
Luc
Yes i saw it... but i didn't realize it was an update. I thought it only was a 'beautified' version of the first one. ;)
But it makes no difference. When i connect it like the drawing on reply #110, i also get the sum of the two inductances, not the difference. The direction of my windings is exactly the same as in your picture. The only difference is that i only have 1 layer, you have 5. But this should make no difference.
Tomorrow i will make some tests with the coil.
Hi Everyone,
This is the most up to date circuit.
Thanks Luc,
mrock
Quote from: gyulasun on March 18, 2010, 07:01:24 PM
Luc,
Sorry I do not understand where exactly is the 100 Ohm carbon resistor:
in series with the source electrode of the FET?
Gyula
EDIT: Ok now I figured out it is in series with the GND clip coming from the signal gen.
Hi Gyula,
could you calculate an estimated amount of micro watts the switch could be leaking into the circuit using the scope shot I attached below?
I have the pickup coil at 1.85vdc on a 2% 1/2 watt 10K Ohm load = 0.00034 Watts. I'm also only using a half wave rectifier at this time.
The below is what's I scoped across the 5% 100 Ohm MOSFET gate resistor when the coil is adjusted at the neutral point (no current taken or returned).
Please keep in mind that the negative pulses are not used for the MOSFET.
Thanks
Luc
I have been advised that what you have is a boost converter without a load.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boost_converter
what say ye?
Harry
Quote from: skywatcher on March 18, 2010, 09:16:56 PM
Yes i saw it... but i didn't realize it was an update. I thought it only was a 'beautified' version of the first one. ;)
But it makes no difference. When i connect it like the drawing on reply #110, i also get the sum of the two inductances, not the difference. The direction of my windings is exactly the same as in your picture. The only difference is that i only have 1 layer, you have 5. But this should make no difference.
Tomorrow i will make some tests with the coil.
Hi skywatcher,
are you saying that you get the high inductance when connected as per drawing?
If so, then this is what you want. Also, my tests have shown that there is a preferable side to connect the positive and negative, so this is why we are going into details on the drawing.
Let me know if you are not getting the high inductance value.
Thanks
Luc
Hi Luc,
Your diagram appears to show your Toroid as split. Did you get your Toroid in two pieces, or did you cut it yourself? If so, what kind of saw did you use, and do you know the thickness of the cut or "Kerf"? Thanks for efforts.
P.S. Not sure if you saw my comment about your halogen desk lamp on video 5, but I was hoping you could turn it off, as a test (these lamps can create surprisingly large electromagnetic fields).
Hi all,
here is a new video demonstrating a pickup coil and a LED as load.
Link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bgPR9r14zWE
Luc
Harryv
This is not a boost converter as none of them will recharge the input source(cap) while being operated. Ive tried.
And you wont find any dc/dc converters with magnets on the coil core. ;]
Mags
Quote from: Magluvin on March 18, 2010, 11:30:19 PM
Harryv
This is not a boost converter as none of them will recharge the input source(cap) while being operated. Ive tried.
And you wont find any dc/dc converters with magnets on the coil core. ;]
Mags
Indeed!
I'll pass that information back.
luc
That led test may not prove much. When you put the led on the mosfet, you are providing a new current path with the led that wasnt there before, and the leds brightness will be more at higher voltage of the output than the voltage produced by the sig input, kind of like a jt. I would not go any further to prove anything, in fact, I am thinking you can use a pickup coil to provide input to the mosfet to replace the signal gen. Maybe a variable res to match the pickups output to the fet. And the phase relationship can be easily reversed to give proper pulse to the fet from the pickup. ;]
This might be real easy.
Mags
@Luc
BTW, did you attend a Thane Heins' Perepiteia demo about 2 years ago?
At the time he had recently got permission to set up his Perepiteia in a undergraduate EE lab. I was there and a few others along with a student reporter
from the university newspaper.
Quote from: derricka on March 18, 2010, 11:11:35 PM
Hi Luc,
Your diagram appears to show your Toroid as split. Did you get your Toroid in two pieces, or did you cut it yourself? If so, what kind of saw did you use, and do you know the thickness of the cut or "Kerf"? Thanks for efforts.
P.S. Not sure if you saw my comment about your halogen desk lamp on video 5, but I was hoping you could turn it off, as a test (these lamps can create surprisingly large electromagnetic fields).
Hi derricka,
no! the toroid is not split, the line is there just to show it's two coils. I wish I could buy them split!!! make a toroid in no time ;D
I saw your comment about the light. It's not the source of the power. Do you not hear me switching it on and off in my video's to better see the scope shots and the circuit keeps working?
Luc
Quote from: HarryV on March 19, 2010, 12:06:18 AM
@Luc
BTW, did you attend a Thane Heins' Perepiteia demo about 2 years ago?
At the time he had recently got permission to set up his Perepiteia in a undergraduate EE lab. I was there and a few others along with a student reporter
from the university newspaper.
Yes Harry! I was there. So that is you ;D
Nice to see you here
Luc
Quote from: Magluvin on March 18, 2010, 11:49:14 PM
luc
That led test may not prove much. When you put the led on the mosfet, you are providing a new current path with the led that wasnt there before, and the leds brightness will be more at higher voltage of the output than the voltage produced by the sig input, kind of like a jt. I would not go any further to prove anything, in fact, I am thinking you can use a pickup coil to provide input to the mosfet to replace the signal gen. Maybe a variable res to match the pickups output to the fet. And the phase relationship can be easily reversed to give proper pulse to the fet from the pickup. ;]
This might be real easy.
Mags
Actually, Lindsay Mannix posted a great idea at the Overunity Research forum topic.
If the opto output is sourced from the storage caps, effective isolation WILL occour .
The storage cap voltage will have to be at 12 volts or so to be capable of switching correctly
The point is to entirely remove the probability that the drive is the source before getting too excited about the rest of it.
It doesnt matter why, just remove the variable.So all I need now is to test the opto isolator I have on hand to see if they can handle these kind of switching frequencies.
This will have to wait for several days because of my son's visit.
Luc
QuoteHi Luc,
Exactly what I noticed also. And the even better thing is, that *might* such happen, It does in no single way 'break' any law or interference with CoE.
It is just the Bloch Wall domains receiving an 'extra' kick from the magnet that is sitting there. At the end of the pulse, these domains will be 'shaken' for a while -at a rather high frequency- and the energy released from the *motion* of these domains *do* exit the coil.
Your pickup coil is collecting these, and as you mentioned before, most if not all the supplied energy put in the coil comes back in the Cap.
What is basically happening is that instead the magnet is moving, the domains inside the core do 'move', and by such cause [in combination with the magnet] an extra -short moment- of Additional Energy.
--
NextGen67
Quote from: HarryV on March 18, 2010, 05:34:22 PM
The magnets could be moving, or rather vibrating, but with an amplitude which is too small for you to see (or perhaps even feel?).
Luc: I agree HarryV this could be happening. At frequencies of 30KHz and over, movement would not be detectable.
Such could be indeed the case, however...
If the magnet would move/vibrate instead of the domains then [I think that]:
1) The [to receive] charge would go along the Y-ax [which means pick-up coil would be positioned wrong].
2) The core windings would [probably?] *not* have the effect [the cap charge back I mean here] that we notice now, because the magnet should have been positioned along the Z-ax in such a case, which would be very weird.
Which leads to a quick confirmation test:
When we place a small pick-up coil at the 'S' pole position, we would pick-up [considerable more] charge than what is being pick-up now(*), because *if* the magnet would move/vibrate, most of the charge would be able to receive at the magnet S and N pole.
(*) It is possible that when a small coil placed there, it *does* pick-up [a rather small] amount of charge, since the magnets field would [probably?] be affected by it's interaction with the core's domains [like see such as a Cemf, seen from magnet perspective!]. Also, actually Picking-up charge here *would* decrease what is being returned to the coil [and as such cap], because in *this* case the coils wire is being affected.
P.S.: Maybe someone could do a clean up of my quick copy and paste drawing?(**)
P.S.2: I wanted to make a similar drawing, but then seen from the coil [core] perspective, but since the wiring is not standard, I have trouble in seeing how such would be graphically represented... Maybe some of you here could draw up such ?
P.S.3: It might become clear that if the magnet is placed TO near the coil, it's magnetic fieldwould pass the X-as border [the halve of the coil], which *could* reduce the effect [pick-up] we notice now. Also, placing an extra magnet [as shown in the drawing] might increase the effect we notice ?
P.S.4: The above description is not totally correct, as [small] parts of it *seem* to contradict Luc's scope results, but [at this point of time] to me, this seems a pretty close estimation of the effect we notice, and I have *indications* of why parts *seem* to contradict.
P.S.5: I do of course not argue about the fact that the magnet *its field* is vibrating.
(**) To ADD in the clean-up drawing:
Notice that we talk about a different than normal effect here... Normally (and it still does) the magnet interact with the coils wire, and in such influences with what is returned back into the coil [and in such cap]... However, the 2nd and greatly overlooked side effect [and *this* influences the pick-up coil(s)], is that charge seems to be radiated outwards of the coil [by means of magnetic field], which is at a 90 degree angle with the coils input energy... *This* also could be why the input and output energy do not inteference with each other, since they are not on the same phase.
Now, *if* the AE[Additional Energy] returned in the pick-up coil(s) would be *more* then what is being lost over the coil [and circuit] resistance, we could argue that this AE in, would in fact be enough to be able to redirect this AE energy back into the circuit, and we would have our first ever *confirmed* self runner.... However there are still a lot factors which might prohibit such.
--
NextGen67
gotoluc
As you powered led with extra coil what stopped you from connecting led back to the gate of mosfet and closing loop then disconnecting function generator ? Or using more pickup coils and power directly an oscillator chip driving mosfet ?
Quote from: gotoluc on March 18, 2010, 05:56:07 PM
I agree HarryV this could be happening. At frequencies of 30KHz and over, movement would not be detectable.
Luc
with a small mirror glued on the magnets and laser pointer you can amplify the vibration effect if exist .
great work!
Quote from: wings on March 19, 2010, 04:40:26 AM
with a small mirror glued on the magnets and laser pointer you can amplify the vibration effect if exist .
great work!
A very good idea... Hopefully Luc has such a pen pointer laying around. Over a two meter range or so, this would be enough to visible show any effect. However, in such case also be sure to confirm and check the desk also for possible hum frequency (power line for example, or electronics inside the generator) which could cause the whole desk [and as such his magnet also] to vibrate.
--
NextGen67
Quote from: forest on March 19, 2010, 04:26:53 AM
gotoluc
As you powered led with extra coil what stopped you from connecting led back to the gate of mosfet and closing loop then disconnecting function generator ? Or using more pickup coils and power directly an oscillator chip driving mosfet ?
:) I think that is what we all trying to work at, and certainly Luc his goal. Tough at this stage, he can't feed that back, since he needs the right pulse frequency and duty cycle. In a while maybe :-) Also for now -that is my opinion- I am more interested in the effect of the generators added energy. It will be a good idea to have a final conclusion about that first.
--
NextGen67
Quote from: gotoluc on March 18, 2010, 09:49:16 PM
Hi skywatcher,
are you saying that you get the high inductance when connected as per drawing?
If so, then this is what you want. Also, my tests have shown that there is a preferable side to connect the positive and negative, so this is why we are going into details on the drawing.
Let me know if you are not getting the high inductance value.
Thanks
Luc
If i connect it as it's shown in the drawing, i get the high inductance.
Maybe we have some confusion here... do you have 1043 mH or 1.034 mH ?
Somewhere there was 1.034 mH or 1,034 mH (but , and . for me mean the same: a decimal point).
Maybe we should use only . as decimal point and don't use commas as 'spacers' because that's confusing...
At least it's confusing for european people. ;)
But when you get the high inductance (about 4 times the inductance of one half of the winding) then my 'theory of operation' falls apart, and i wonder why it's necessary to wind it this way and why it will not work if it's wound in the normal way.
I'm interested in values of capacitor used and coil inductance compared to frequency driving circuit in stable state and in excess energy generated.Is resonant frequency in harmonic relation to best working frequency from function generator ? I can't find exact capacitor capacitance in comparison to running frequency from function generator.
Quote from: skywatcher on March 19, 2010, 05:49:51 AM
...
Maybe we have some confusion here... do you have 1043 mH or 1.034 mH ?
Somewhere there was 1.034 mH or 1,034 mH (but , and . for me mean the same: a decimal point).
Maybe we should use only . as decimal point and don't use commas as 'spacers' because that's confusing...
At least it's confusing for european people. ;)
...
@skywatcher
To make it quicker for you get answer, I can say it is 1043mH i.e 1.043 Henry, when the two coils are connected in series as shown in the latest corrected schematic, ok? This is 100% sure. And it is WITHOUT the permanent magnets.
(Luc never mixed up the comma with the dot for indicating decimal point.
As you know, dot is for the decimal point in English. Sometimes it is mixed up, unfortunately, with comma.)
rgds, Gyula
Quote from: gotoluc on March 18, 2010, 09:40:55 PM
Hi Gyula,
could you calculate an estimated amount of micro watts the switch could be leaking into the circuit using the scope shot I attached below?
I have the pickup coil at 1.85vdc on a 2% 1/2 watt 10K Ohm load = 0.00034 Watts. I'm also only using a half wave rectifier at this time.
The below is what's I scoped across the 5% 100 Ohm MOSFET gate resistor when the coil is adjusted at the neutral point (no current taken or returned).
Please keep in mind that the negative pulses are not used for the MOSFET.
Thanks
Luc
Hi Luc,
From the waveform data your scope shot shows we can approximate pretty well how much driving power goes INTO the MOSFET at its gate source input.
The current flowing across the 100 Ohm carbon resistor is I=.3438V/100=3.438mA. Here I considered the RMS value of the peak to peak waveform of 3.44V (yellow trace).
This is the current actually flowing into the gate source path (and this path of course includes all the loading effects coming from the output side of the FET i.e. from the drain side).
So the input power to the gate source of the MOSFET is P
inp=4.5V*3.438mA=15.47mW
(I used half of the 9.06V peak to peak value of the gate source voltage (green trace) because for a regular square wave the RMS value is half of the peak to peak value and I took your wave form as a regular one to simplify things.)
We have to add to this the power dissipated in the 100 Ohm series resistor, which is about 1.18mW (.3438
2/100).
So your signal generator provides about 15.47 + 1.18=16.65mW input to the MOSFET. Now I cannot tell you how much from this leaks through to the tank circuit, maybe others can help here too. Will think about it.
rgds, Gyula
Quote from: wings on March 19, 2010, 04:40:26 AM
with a small mirror glued on the magnets and laser pointer you can amplify the vibration effect if exist .
great work!
@wings,
Actually thinking of it, the magnet would actually possibly vibrate a bit, considering the 5 layers... Some of the energy input is leaking out of the toroid wiring, and as such they *might* get the magnet to vibrate...
However, I'm not pointing to that effect.
It still will be very interesting to see if the magnet indeed vibrates.
--
NextGen67
Quote from: NextGen67 on March 19, 2010, 03:34:11 AM
Such could be indeed the case, however...
If the magnet would move/vibrate instead of the domains then [I think that]:
1) The [to receive] charge would go along the Y-ax [which means pick-up coil would be positioned wrong].
2) The core windings would [probably?] *not* have the effect [the cap charge back I mean here] that we notice now, because the magnet should have been positioned along the Z-ax in such a case, which would be very weird.
Which leads to a quick confirmation test:
When we place a small pick-up coil at the 'S' pole position, we would pick-up [considerable more] charge than what is being pick-up now(*), because *if* the magnet would move/vibrate, most of the charge would be able to receive at the magnet S and N pole.
(*) It is possible that when a small coil placed there, it *does* pick-up [a rather small] amount of charge, since the magnets field would [probably?] be affected by it's interaction with the core's domains [like see such as a Cemf, seen from magnet perspective!]. Also, actually Picking-up charge here *would* decrease what is being returned to the coil [and as such cap], because in *this* case the coils wire is being affected.
P.S.: Maybe someone could do a clean up of my quick copy and paste drawing?(**)
P.S.2: I wanted to make a similar drawing, but then seen from the coil [core] perspective, but since the wiring is not standard, I have trouble in seeing how such would be graphically represented... Maybe some of you here could draw up such ?
P.S.3: It might become clear that if the magnet is placed TO near the coil, it's magnetic fieldwould pass the X-as border [the halve of the coil], which *could* reduce the effect [pick-up] we notice now. Also, placing an extra magnet [as shown in the drawing] might increase the effect we notice ?
P.S.4: The above description is not totally correct, as [small] parts of it *seem* to contradict Luc's scope results, but [at this point of time] to me, this seems a pretty close estimation of the effect we notice, and I have *indications* of why parts *seem* to contradict.
P.S.5: I do of course not argue about the fact that the magnet *its field* is vibrating.
(**) To ADD in the clean-up drawing:
Notice that we talk about a different than normal effect here... Normally (and it still does) the magnet interact with the coils wire, and in such influences with what is returned back into the coil [and in such cap]... However, the 2nd and greatly overlooked side effect [and *this* influences the pick-up coil(s)], is that charge seems to be radiated outwards of the coil [by means of magnetic field], which is at a 90 degree angle with the coils input energy... *This* also could be why the input and output energy do not inteference with each other, since they are not on the same phase.
Now, *if* the AE[Additional Energy] returned in the pick-up coil(s) would be *more* then what is being lost over the coil [and circuit] resistance, we could argue that this AE in, would in fact be enough to be able to redirect this AE energy back into the circuit, and we would have our first ever *confirmed* self runner.... However there are still a lot factors which might prohibit such.
--
NextGen67
Hi NextGen67,
thanks for your input and drawing. Adding magnets at both ends is something I was considering to test and is on my list of things to test.
I will report the results after doing the test or make a video if it works well.
Thanks for sharing
Luc
Now i have build my setup. :)
First some data:
Ferrite core: 35 mm outer diameter, 23 mm inner diameter, height 15 mm
Exact material and permeability is unknown. I don't even know from where i got it. ;)
Coil: one layer of 0.4 mm wire, combined inductance 315 mH
Capacitor: 120000 uF / 15 V electrolytic
MOSFET: BUZ11, with 680 ohm resistor at the gate
Although my coil has a different inductance, the resonant frequency is also at about 15 kHz. :D
I can clearly hear it, so the coil and/or the magnet vibrates.
And it's also 'self-running'. I can remove the power lines from the capacitor and it continues running. The peak voltage measured at the middle of the coil is about 35 V. But i'm still skeptical. I think the energy comes from the generator, through the gate of the MOSFET. It also runs without the magnet, at a slightly lower resonant frequency. But without the magnet i can not hear any sound.
@skywatcher
Would you tell what is the DC voltage in the electrolytic cap?
Also, you use the 680 Ohm in parallel with the input i.e. parallel with gate-source, right? What is the input square wave amplitude I wonder.
Thanks, Gyula
Quote from: gyulasun on March 19, 2010, 10:02:25 AM
Would you tell what is the DC voltage in the electrolytic cap?
Also, you use the 680 Ohm in parallel with the input i.e. parallel with gate-source, right? What is the input square wave amplitude I wonder.
The DC voltage at the cap is 6.16 V. It's constant, as far as i can see with my multimeter.
The resistor is in series with the gate (to protect the generator against short circuit in case something goes wrong). The square wave voltage measured directly at the gate is 2.8 Vpp.
Quote from: forest on March 19, 2010, 04:26:53 AM
gotoluc
As you powered led with extra coil what stopped you from connecting led back to the gate of mosfet and closing loop then disconnecting function generator ? Or using more pickup coils and power directly an oscillator chip driving mosfet ?
To everyoneOne way to Isolate the signal generator is to use an OPTO Isolator and connect the switching side of the OPTO to the capacitor bank to feed the mosfet gate. I do have a 4N35 and a H11D1 which I both tried last night but they are way too slow to shut off. At 1KHz they were at 95% duty and to full on with frequencies over that. My signal generator is fixed at 50% duty. So these are not working or I don't know how to connect them correctly. If someone with electronic knowledge can recommend an Isolator which could work a up to 50KHz and still keep the 50% duty cycle using a component that I can pickup locally please look at the two suppliers in my city for stock: http://www.resetelectronics.com/VALUE/index.asp or http://www.active123.com/
The other way is using the pickup coil to trigger the mosfet. This is complicated because the pickup coil is a sine wave that it peaks are out of phase with the mosfet pulses. So again I'm at a loss of how to use this energy or build a circuit that could create the very exact frequency, gate drive voltage and current that is needed.
I'll see if I can pickup a CMOS 555 locally and try to power it from the cap bank by keeping it in the 10vdc range.
AT EVERYONE If you know how to close the loop please provide a complete drawing of how to build it. Please do not just say do this and that. I am willing to do everything I can and I think I have done all I can with my minimal electronic knowledge I have.
Thank you for your time
Quote from: wings on March 19, 2010, 04:40:26 AM
with a small mirror glued on the magnets and laser pointer you can amplify the vibration effect if exist .
great work!
Good idea wings!
Thanks for sharing
Luc
Quote from: gyulasun on March 19, 2010, 08:56:17 AM
Hi Luc,
<...>
Now I cannot tell you how much from this leaks through to the tank circuit, maybe others can help here too. Will think about it.
rgds, Gyula
Gyula,
Would it not be possible to simply attach only the signal generator to the mosfet and then connect the Cap to the source and drain, and just observe what goes into the cap ?
Actually a [known] voltage/amperage could be supplied to get it at the correct working point, but this can with a calculation be subtracted from the cap value later again?
EDIT: No need to attach battery I guess, since the signal generator can easily deliver enough voltage ? Anyhow, after say 5 minutes of charge, one could see how much the cap collected.
--
NextGen67
Quote from: NextGen67 on March 19, 2010, 10:54:11 AM
Gyula,
Would it not be possible to simply attach only the signal generator to the mosfet and then connect the Cap to the source and drain, and just observe what goes into the cap ?
Actually a [known] voltage/amperage could be supplied to get it at the correct working point, but this can with a calculation be subtracted from the cap value later again?
EDIT: No need to attach battery I guess, since the signal generator can easily deliver enough voltage ? Anyhow, after say 5 minutes of charge, one could see how much the cap collected.
--
NextGen67
Hi NextGen,
If you remove the toroidal coil, you cannot get resonance at all, hence there cannot be significant voltage developed in the cap if you test your suggested circuit. This is what I think.
Luc already exactly maintains equlibrium between the output circuit losses and the input power from the generator, I am afraid, because you can see from his video the zero current is achievable in the 1 Ohm resistor between the electrolytic caps, this resistor just monitors the current taken out or pumped into the tank circuit. Luc can get both positive and negative currents in the resistor, so just zero value shows equlibrium: loss=input (this is what I think).
Notice here that I did not mention the output power received in the pick up coil or later in coils, that would be already an extra gain.
Gyula
Quote from: gyulasun on March 19, 2010, 08:56:17 AM
Hi Luc,
From the waveform data your scope shot shows we can approximate pretty well how much driving power goes INTO the MOSFET at its gate source input.
The current flowing across the 100 Ohm carbon resistor is I=.3438V/100=3.438mA. Here I considered the RMS value of the peak to peak waveform of 3.44V (yellow trace).
This is the current actually flowing into the gate source path (and this path of course includes all the loading effects coming from the output side of the FET i.e. from the drain side).
So the input power to the gate source of the MOSFET is Pinp=4.5V*3.438mA=15.47mW
(I used half of the 9.06V peak to peak value of the gate source voltage (green trace) because for a regular square wave the RMS value is half of the peak to peak value and I took your wave form as a regular one to simplify things.)
We have to add to this the power dissipated in the 100 Ohm series resistor, which is about 1.18mW (.34382/100).
So your signal generator provides about 15.47 + 1.18=16.65mW input to the MOSFET. Now I cannot tell you how much from this leaks through to the tank circuit, maybe others can help here too. Will think about it.
rgds, Gyula
Thanks Gyula for taking the time to calculate and post this data.
My local supplier has a CMOS version of the 555 timer and I'll pick one up today. I'll go this direction for now, as it seems to be the easiest answer. I'll power it from the capacitor bank so this way we can compare accurately what is drawn to what is produced by the pickup coil.
Luc
Luc,
Would this not be a good solution ? Then no need for a seperate opto at all, as it is build in the mosfet.
http://pdf1.alldatasheet.com/datasheet-pdf/view/139498/TELEDYNE/TC4804.html
EDIT: Attached PDF
--
NextGen67
@gotoluc
Do you have any germanium diodes. You mentioned somewhere you were using a half bridge and I am wondering if you are not better to make one with germanium diodes. They may leak back somewhat but they only need .2 volts and may just add a new effect.
Also, please make sure you will always be able to go back to square one and get the original effect, while you play around these other ideas.
Hi Luc,
I attach a circuit schematic for you to test the opto coupler, first with still your signal generator output. Use a series 1.5-2 kOhm resistor between the generator and the opto diode input to confine forward current to 10mA or even below for the input diode in the opto coupler, ok?
Your 4N35 opto coupler has 7us (microsecond) rise and fall times so it should work up to about 70kHz (1/7+7).
If you still find it cannot switch at 40-50 kHz, than you may use CNY17-3 from Active Tech,
http://www.active123.com/eng/storeSection/redirect.cfm?sectionID=b2c/search/productSearchResults.cfm&itemCategoryLevel2=43754&itemCategoryLevel1=43746&number_results=12 it has 5us rise and fall times, hence should go up to 100kHz, see data sheet:
http://skory.gylcomp.hu/alkatresz/CNY17%20-1-4.pdf
The 10kOhm resistor between the gate source of the IRF640 could be increased to reduce current taken from the electrolytic capacitor, and do not let the voltage in this cap higher that 20V because this is the maximum limit for the gate source voltage for this MOSFET.
rgds, Gyula
EDIT: The output transistor in the opto coupler has a floating base pin, do not connect it to anything, leave it open.
If you can reach higher than 20V in the electrolytic cap, then use another 10kOhm in series with the collector of the opto transistor, this way you divide the higher than 20V into just half of it, now within safe voltages for the gate-source. Now the upper limit is the collector emitter maximum voltage allowed for the opto transistor, this is 30V.
@gyula,
Just send you a PM.
--
NextGen67
Quote from: NextGen67 on March 19, 2010, 11:40:02 AM
Luc,
Would this not be a good solution ? Then no need for a seperate opto at all, as it is build in the mosfet.
http://pdf1.alldatasheet.com/datasheet-pdf/view/139498/TELEDYNE/TC4804.html
EDIT: Attached PDF
--
NextGen67
I don't know? maybe Gyula can comment on this!
Luc
Quote from: wattsup on March 19, 2010, 11:53:06 AM
@gotoluc
Do you have any germanium diodes. You mentioned somewhere you were using a half bridge and I am wondering if you are not better to make one with germanium diodes. They may leak back somewhat but they only need .2 volts and may just add a new effect.
Also, please make sure you will always be able to go back to square one and get the original effect, while you play around these other ideas.
No germanium diodes :(
Yes, I'm careful with the coil.
Luc
Quote from: NextGen67 on March 19, 2010, 11:40:02 AM
Luc,
Would this not be a good solution ? Then no need for a seperate opto at all, as it is build in the mosfet.
http://pdf1.alldatasheet.com/datasheet-pdf/view/139498/TELEDYNE/TC4804.html
EDIT: Attached PDF
--
NextGen67
MAXIMUM OPERATING FREQUENCY 1.2 MHz
-Nice-
LightRider
Quote from: gyulasun on March 19, 2010, 12:03:45 PM
Hi Luc,
I attach a circuit schematic for you to test the opto coupler, first with still your signal generator output. Use a series 1.5-2 kOhm resistor between the generator and the opto diode input to confine forward current to 10mA or even below for the input diode in the opto coupler, ok?
Your 4N35 opto coupler has 7us (microsecond) rise and fall times so it should work up to about 70kHz (1/7+7).
If you still find it cannot switch at 40-50 kHz, than you may use CNY17-3 from Active Tech,
http://www.active123.com/eng/storeSection/redirect.cfm?sectionID=b2c/search/productSearchResults.cfm&itemCategoryLevel2=43754&itemCategoryLevel1=43746&number_results=12 it has 5us rise and fall times, hence should go up to 100kHz, see data sheet:
http://skory.gylcomp.hu/alkatresz/CNY17%20-1-4.pdf
The 10kOhm resistor between the gate source of the IRF640 could be increased to reduce current taken from the electrolytic capacitor, and do not let the voltage in this cap higher that 20V because this is the maximum limit for the gate source voltage for this MOSFET.
rgds, Gyula
Hi Gyula,
thanks for the schematic. That's exactly how I had the 4N35 connected last night and I also had the 10K between the gate and source to shut the mosfet off.
I don't understand why it was only working at low frequencies ??? I'll see if they really have the CNY17-3 in stock when I pickup the CMOS 555
Thanks for your help.
Luc
UPDATEI just checked and they have the CNY17-3 in stock
Quote from: gotoluc on March 19, 2010, 10:17:25 AM
To everyone
One way to Isolate the signal generator is to use an OPTO Isolator and connect the switching side of the OPTO to the capacitor bank to feed the mosfet gate. I do have a 4N35 and a H11D1 which I both tried last night but they are way too slow to shut off. At 1KHz they were at 95% duty and to full on with frequencies over that. My signal generator is fixed at 50% duty. So these are not working or I don't know how to connect them correctly. If someone with electronic knowledge can recommend an Isolator which could A a up to 50KHz and still keep the 50% duty cycle using a component that I can pickup locally please look at the two suppliers in my city for stock: http://www.resetelectronics.com/VALUE/index.asp or http://www.active123.com/
The other way is using the pickup coil to trigger the mosfet. This is complicated because the pickup coil is a sine wave that it peaks are out of phase with the mosfet pulses. So again I'm at a loss of how to use this energy or build a circuit that could create the very exact frequency, gate drive voltage and current that is needed.
I'll see if I can pickup a CMOS 555 locally and try to power it from the cap bank by keeping it in the 10vdc range.
AT EVERYONE If you know how to close the loop please provide a complete drawing of how to build it. Please do not just say do this and that. I am willing to do everything I can and I think I have done all I can with my minimal electronic knowledge I have.
Thank you for your time
Hi Luc
The 4N35 you are using appears to be slow, TurnOn, TurnOff times of 2 microseconds typical with max of 10 microseconds. So total rise plus fall would be 4 typical and 20 max allowable per their specs. This equates to frequencies of 250Khz but also within the specs as low as 50 Khz. And this allows for No Flat on the pulse, just rise and fall. Then the flat part of the cycle needs to be accounted for (the post indicates 50% of the total pulse length) Most likely to be safe, something much faster maybe needed if you are routinely operating at 50Khz or more.
Something to possibly look at
OPI2000MK specs claim up to 2Mb/sec with propagation times of 800 nanosecs.
http://www.bot.co.uk/UserDocs/OPI2000MK.pdf
Maybe even something faster
AgilentHCPL-0708 15Mb
Output rise and fall times in the 20-25 nanosecond ranges,
max propagationtimes of 60 ns
http://www.datasheetcatalog.org/datasheet2/1/0351i6kp2qlj3sqzoc47hh3yespy.pdf
I hope this helps
Mike
Quote from: gotoluc on March 19, 2010, 12:20:01 PM
Hi Gyula,
thanks for the schematic. That's exactly how I had the 4N35 connected last night and I also had the 10K between the gate and source to shut the mosfet off.
I don't understand why it was only working at low frequencies ??? I'll see if they really have the CNY17-3 in stock when I pickup the CMOS 555
Thanks for your help.
Luc
UPDATE
I just checked and they have the CNY17-3 in stock
Well, then probably the 10kOhm slows down switching, unfortunately. But if you reduce it to 1-2 kOhm or lower to increase speed, then power consumption from the capacitor goes sky high.
Yes I would agree with using the TC4804-05 opto MOSFET driver in itself, no need for the IRF640 then. IF the TC4804 or 05 does not include the body diode for its output FET, you can connect a fast diode there instead.
rgds, Gyula
Luc, I agree with Mike, I did not consider the flat on and off parts of the pulses, sorry. This means that you would not have higher frequency success with the CNY17-3 either, maybe to as high as 10-15kHz.
Also the speed depends on the opto diode input forward current too. The higher the current is the speedyer the device is, up to the data sheet limits of course. And here we cannot spend current for speed.
Thanks, Gyula
Quote from: NextGen67 on March 19, 2010, 10:54:11 AM
Gyula,
Would it not be possible to simply attach only the signal generator to the mosfet and then connect the Cap to the source and drain, and just observe what goes into the cap ?
Actually a [known] voltage/amperage could be supplied to get it at the correct working point, but this can with a calculation be subtracted from the cap value later again?
EDIT: No need to attach battery I guess, since the signal generator can easily deliver enough voltage ? Anyhow, after say 5 minutes of charge, one could see how much the cap collected.
--
NextGen67
Hi,
After your message I have reconsidered what you suggested and I think a test would be worth doing as per your schematic in your above post.
I cannot forecast what the voltage might be in the cap.
If I recall correctly, Luc measured the drain source peak to peak AC voltage as about 3V in one of his videos. And then his input AC voltage was about 9V peak to peak across the gate source. This would mean that just due to the gate source interelectrode capacitor (some hundred pF, voltage dependent) the 9V couples through 3V to the drain source side from the 9V but this is a guess from here because the schematic was the full circuit, not what you drew above.
Now that the high speed TC4804 or 05 MOSFET driver would make the IRF 640 obsolote in this circuit, maybe the question you pose is not a question any more?
Thanks, Gyula
Quote from: gyulasun on March 19, 2010, 12:51:20 PM
Luc, I agree with Mike, I did not consider the flat on and off parts of the pulses, sorry. This means that you would not have higher frequency success with the CNY17-3 either, maybe to as high as 10-15kHz.
Also the speed depends on the opto diode input forward current too. The higher the current is the speeder the device is, up to the data sheet limits of course. And here we cannot spend current for speed.
Thanks, Gyula
So, that means we are left over using the TC4804-05 opto MOSFET driver in itself (or similar types, this was the first one coming in mind).
It has a wide enough range for Frequency (up to 1.2Mhz), but you might want to take a look at the specs in the data sheet if there is no other obstacle... It's maximum voltage is also 20 volt.
The data sheet is attached in my message about the TC4804 earlier.
--
NextGen67
Quote from: gyulasun on March 19, 2010, 01:03:00 PM
Hi,
After your message I have reconsidered what you suggested and I think a test would be worth doing as per your schematic in your above post.
I cannot forecast what the voltage might be in the cap.
If I recall correctly, Luc measured the drain source peak to peak AC voltage as about 3V in one of his videos. And then his input AC voltage was about 9V peak to peak across the gate source. This would mean that just due to the gate source interelectrode capacitor (some hundred pF, voltage dependent) the 9V couples through 3V to the drain source side from the 9V but this is a guess from here because the schematic was the full circuit, not what you drew above.
Now that the high speed TC4804 or 05 MOSFET driver would make the IRF 640 obsolote in this circuit, maybe the question you pose is not a question any more?
Thanks, Gyula
For me personally, I definitely would still like to do the test. But it is up to Luc of course. It is a step that *could* be skipped using the Opto mosfet. It is just that it would help me in estimating how great are the chances on success ;)
EDIT: About the cannot forecast what the voltage might be in the cap, is exactly what I am searching for also, and this test would [likely] give some conclusions about that. Given a 5 minute time frame of loading or so, would give a really good indication of what is going on at the Gate side, and would help me to determine if my theory is correct.
[optionally, a voltage could also be supplied -together with the generator, to *simulate* a CAP charge-, as I mentioned in the previous message with the drawing, but then this *must* be a sharply defined voltage/amperage, so it can -calculative wise- later on be subtracted from the charge in the cap].
--
NextGen67
I couldn't find a reference to the spx- part number that both
Naudin and Steorn seem to use for their optoisolator. I estimate
this part has a fairly high data rate therefore good signal
reproduction on the output side. One could see a data type
led coupled to a data transistor by a short segment of optical
fiber making a very low input to output capacitance for AC -
high isolation. Someone with access to these other opto parts
should find a good one for a 40KHz square wave, so everyone
doesn't have to purchase suboptimal components. Don't
forget that Fourier Transform Decomposition says that
squarewaves contain higher frequency components.
Also some opto's bring out their output transistor base to a pin
often for connecting a 100Kohm resistor to the output collector...
That resistor might help waveform symmetry on slower speed
opto parts.
---
Note All: that I think Gotoluc has sold me that a variable resistor
is needed in series with the mosfet gate to carefully trim the
drive power for overunity operation. This would substitute
exactly for his signal generator square wave level control setting.
Especially for use with an opto. Once it was set for optimal it
could be left as is. One of those small blue box shaped plastic
10turn trimpots would work. My calculations show that a 5K
variable resistor (not a fixed res.) works for the IRF640. This
is for gate series (not voltage divider) operation to conserve power.
:S:MarkSCoffman
Quote from: NextGen67 on March 19, 2010, 01:06:53 PM
So, that means we are left over using the TC4804-05 opto MOSFET driver in itself (or similar types, this was the first one coming in mind).
It has a wide enough range for Frequency (up to 1.2Mhz), but you might want to take a look at the specs in the data sheet if there is no other obstacle... It's maximum voltage is also 20 volt.
The data sheet is attached in my message about the TC4804 earlier.
--
NextGen67
Hi,
In fact it was the second time I have seen the TC4804 or 05 suggested to Luc, the first one was written by Peter yesterday at http://www.overunityresearch.com also data sheet attached there.
The 20V max voltage might be a limiting factor on using this type, though it possibly could be solved if were needed.
Of course the type of the opto couplers, opto drivers, or opto relays is open to choose, there surely are devices out there which may be even better than the TC4804 family. It needs searching and studying.
Question also if they are the off the shelf or to be ordered and their price.
rgds, Gyula
Quote from: Magluvin on March 18, 2010, 11:30:19 PM
Harryv
This is not a boost converter as none of them will recharge the input source(cap) while being operated. Ive tried.
And you wont find any dc/dc converters with magnets on the coil core. ;]
Mags
This was his response:
> "This is not a boost converter
I said it was a boost converter _without a load_.
> as none of them will recharge the input
> source(cap) while being operated. Ive tried.
This is because he hasn't tried removing the load. If you do, in the
course of one oscillation cycle, the input source first sources
current, and then sinks current. Note there is a hidden component in
the circuit which is important to understand where the inductor's
current flows to and from in this no load operation, that's the
MOSFET's output capacitance. The IRF640's antiparallel diode is
another hidden component which plays an important role, it prevents
the drain voltage from going below zero.
also look at the circuit diagram under operating principles
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boost_converter
the capacitor seems to be placed differently.
Quote from: mscoffman on March 19, 2010, 01:23:41 PM
I couldn't find a reference to the spx- part number that both
Naudin and Steorn seem to use for their optoisolator.
Hi,
IF you mean this Naudin Orbo setup:
http://jnaudin.free.fr/steorn/images/steornv3b.jpg where he uses a black 'box' attached to the side 'wall' of the rotor between the two toroid cores, then it is an
opto interruptor where the light coming from a LED and going to control an opto transistor is interrupted or not by a small piece of non-opac rotor finger. What Naudin used for this is included here in the Steorn Orbo forum by member haithar:
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=8411.msg228295#msg228295
Quote
Also some opto's bring out their output transistor base to a pin
often for connecting a 100Kohm resistor to the output collector...
That resistor might help waveform symmetry on slower speed
opto parts.
While I agree with this method, it uses some amount of valuable current from the electrolytic puffer cap unfortunately.
rgds, Gyula
@Anyone
I asked my 'advisor' this:
> But the capacitor looks like it is in the wrong place to be a booster
> converter with or without a load.
> compare photo 2:
> http://tinyurl.com/ycw4xm4
>
> with operating principles
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boost_converter
his response:
The capacitor on your photo 2 is in parallel with the battery so it's
part of the converter's input supply. The capacitor in the operating
principles diagram of the wikipedia article is the converter's output
capacitor, which might as well not be there in steady state is there
is no load (once charged it just stays charged at a high voltage, and
the Boost's diode never conducts-- so the diode might as well not be
there either). So everything to the right of the switch in the boost
converter diagram could be removed in no load condition, that's why I
say the circuit operates like a Boost converter without a load. Which
explains why it steps up the input voltage, that's what Boost
converters do.
so is he correct in saying this is a boost converter without a load?
Gotoluc’s Real Self Runner... Gentlemen: “Let us Compute!â€
The data used for the following calculations is taken from:
Self Running Coil Test #7 video â€" (Search for gotoluc on youtube.com)
Since we can’t experiment physically, we will do some theoretical
calculations.
The first calculation finds the equivalent resistance that would discharge
the gain from the bulk capacitors at (about) the same rate the of voltage
gain from the circuit is charging the bulk capacitors. Per second. Taken
from the video.
The voltage on the bulk capacitors: = 16.64volts
Total size of the bulk capacitors = 2 x 3900uf = 7800uf
Approximated change rate in voltage on the bulk capacitors when circuit
is tuned taken from video #7 = 1/100 or .01volts per each (1) second.
Calcs #1: 1/1664 in one second = time period giving = 0.000601Hz.
filter “corner frequency"
Calcs #2: RC (filter spreadsheet) calculator web link;
http://www.muzique.com/schem/filter.htm
C= 7800uf cap., plus .000601Hz freq. gives an RC time constant
R = 34Kohms
This means that when the circuit is charging at a maximum rate that would
be balanced by 34Kohms of additional resistance connected across the
capacitors. This means that our transistor could only have a gate drive
coming through 34Kohm total. I can tell by estimating this amount is
*problems* relative to the gate drive power of the mosfet transistor
IRF640 we are using. Even worse for the Buz11 mosFet.
Now lets find current through 34K ohms at 16.64Volts
E=IR : ma = 16.64V/34. = 0.5ma total available current.
Math Calculator web link;
http://www.math.com/students/calculators/source/scientific.htm
0.5 ma gain current is (x10) too small to supply the SG3525 mosfet osc.
drive circuit estimate of 5.0ma.
---
The second calculation finds the equivalent resistance of two resistors
connected in series.
Rs = R1 + R2. where R1 is the (variable) resistor that converts the total
bulk voltage down to the gate drive voltage where R2 is the resistor
equivalent of the parasitic capacitance of the mosfet being driven at the
frequency of the input signal.
Capacitance gate to output taken from IRF640 spec sheet
Cisd (capacitance of input , to source-drain) = 1560pf = 1.56nf
Frequency of input signal F = 33.3KHz =~ 32KHz.
Bulk Voltage drive to optoisolator VB = 16.64Vdc pp.
Gate drive Voltage to mosfet VG = 10.94Vac pp.
Calc #1: Capacitive impedance calculator web link;
Btw the equation is: [Zohms = 1/(2pi * F * C)]
http://www.cvs1.uklinux.net/cgi-bin/calculators/cap_imp.cgi
C= 1.56nf , at F= 32.0KHz gives an equivalent resistance of about
IRF640 gate @ 32Khz Z equiv: R = 3.2Kohms
Find R1 and R1+R2 where R2/(R2 + R1) :=: VG/VB
Calc #2: R2+R1 = 3.2K/( 10.94V/16.64V) = 4.8Kohms (total drive circuit
impedance)
Calc #3: R1 = 4.8K â€" 3.2K = 1.6K so the variable resistor should be 5Kohms
total, set at about 1/3 up, for 1.6Kohms
Math Calculator web link;
http://www.math.com/students/calculators/source/scientific.htm
---
This suggests that a better transistor type (a non-power) mosfet
might give better results. If we can get a transistor with Cisd down
below 156pf and the Rsd = .15ohms is not critical, then we will be
balancing transistor drive with circuit overunity gain. I think this is
doable. As long as the optoisolator is isolating the AC led drive
through a very small cap 2pf who necessarily cares where the
drive signal originates...For now. Thanks.
:S:MarkSCoffman
Quote from: NextGen67 on March 19, 2010, 03:34:11 AM
Such could be indeed the case, however...
If the magnet would move/vibrate instead of the domains then [I think that]:
1) The [to receive] charge would go along the Y-ax [which means pick-up coil would be positioned wrong].
2) The core windings would [probably?] *not* have the effect [the cap charge back I mean here] that we notice now, because the magnet should have been positioned along the Z-ax in such a case, which would be very weird.
Which leads to a quick confirmation test:
When we place a small pick-up coil at the 'S' pole position, we would pick-up [considerable more] charge than what is being pick-up now(*), because *if* the magnet would move/vibrate, most of the charge would be able to receive at the magnet S and N pole.
(*) It is possible that when a small coil placed there, it *does* pick-up [a rather small] amount of charge, since the magnets field would [probably?] be affected by it's interaction with the core's domains [like see such as a Cemf, seen from magnet perspective!]. Also, actually Picking-up charge here *would* decrease what is being returned to the coil [and as such cap], because in *this* case the coils wire is being affected.
P.S.: Maybe someone could do a clean up of my quick copy and paste drawing?(**)
P.S.2: I wanted to make a similar drawing, but then seen from the coil [core] perspective, but since the wiring is not standard, I have trouble in seeing how such would be graphically represented... Maybe some of you here could draw up such ?
P.S.3: It might become clear that if the magnet is placed TO near the coil, it's magnetic fieldwould pass the X-as border [the halve of the coil], which *could* reduce the effect [pick-up] we notice now. Also, placing an extra magnet [as shown in the drawing] might increase the effect we notice ?
P.S.4: The above description is not totally correct, as [small] parts of it *seem* to contradict Luc's scope results, but [at this point of time] to me, this seems a pretty close estimation of the effect we notice, and I have *indications* of why parts *seem* to contradict.
P.S.5: I do of course not argue about the fact that the magnet *its field* is vibrating.
(**) To ADD in the clean-up drawing:
Notice that we talk about a different than normal effect here... Normally (and it still does) the magnet interact with the coils wire, and in such influences with what is returned back into the coil [and in such cap]... However, the 2nd and greatly overlooked side effect [and *this* influences the pick-up coil(s)], is that charge seems to be radiated outwards of the coil [by means of magnetic field], which is at a 90 degree angle with the coils input energy... *This* also could be why the input and output energy do not inteference with each other, since they are not on the same phase.
Now, *if* the AE[Additional Energy] returned in the pick-up coil(s) would be *more* then what is being lost over the coil [and circuit] resistance, we could argue that this AE in, would in fact be enough to be able to redirect this AE energy back into the circuit, and we would have our first ever *confirmed* self runner.... However there are still a lot factors which might prohibit such.
--
NextGen67
The reason why I suggested the magnet itself is vibrating comes from how
the rotor magnets relate to the core in the torriodal coil in Steorns Orbo. There seems to be a consensus among most people (on both sides of the OU debate) that when the toroidal coil is energized the core essentially becomes magnetically less attractive or 'invisible' to the rotor magnets, allowing the rotor magnets to sweep past without being attracted back to the core with the same action as when approaching the core.
Similarly I would expect the magnets on gotoluc torriod coil are subject to an oscillating** force of attraction as the core's magnetic attractiveness varies with the pulsing current.
addendum: **fluctuating is a better term.
Hey,why not connecting 555 to the capacitor bank ? Just use something to protect from overvoltage and voltage stabilizer.Probably bad idea but anyway...
Quote from: HarryV on March 19, 2010, 02:25:30 PM
The reason why I suggested the magnet itself is vibrating comes from how
the rotor magnets relate to the core in the torriodal coil in Steorns Orbo. There seems to be a consensus among most people (on both sides of the OU debate) that when the toroidal coil is energized the core essentially becomes magnetically less attractive or 'invisible' to the rotor magnets, allowing the rotor magnets to sweep past without being attracted back to the core with the same action as when approaching the core.
Similarly I would expect the magnets on gotoluc torriod coil are subject to an oscillating** force of attraction as the core's magnetic attractiveness varies with the pulsing current.
addendum: **fluctuating is a better term.
HarryV,
You are right in a way.
If the core have a reaction, then the magnet has its counter reaction, I was not clear enough in my idea... What I tried to point out is that the effect we seem to have [the pick-up coils having no influence on the input energy] is caused by the core its domains [and not the magnet vibrating itself].
If you 'tight up' the magnet and the coil together, so that the motion of the magnet is very restricted, this would have a better outcome for the mentioned effect. I do not want to go to deep into this, because it might open a lot of side way argumentation, which would be not a good idea for the progress of Luc's work;)
However, I hope to make it clear what I mentioned before.
Note that this is based on Luc his pick-up coil position, in which he says that the position he found is the best place for optimal receiving of energy.
--
NextGen67
I have some bad and some good news. ;)
The bad news:
After some hours, my circuit stopped working. Voltage on cap was less than 1 V.
Now the good news:
It has been triggered by the generator the whole time, so if there was any power leaking through the gate, it was not enough to keep the circuit running for a infinite time.
The voltage on the cap never increased, so i assume my circuit is not tuned correctly. So i have to try to tune it as Luc showed it to get the cap voltage rising. The only tuning i did so far was the tuning of the generator frequency.
Slightly off-topic:
Today my new scope arrived: http://www.owon.com.cn/eng/hds-n.asp (http://www.owon.com.cn/eng/hds-n.asp)
It's the HDS3102M-N. Looks very nice. 500 MS/s and 100 MHz bandwidth. ;D
It has the big advantage that it's not connected to the mains neutral line so you are absolutely free where to place your measurement ground. With a normal scope, you are always in danger of producing short circuits if the circuit you are measuring is also connected to the mains neutral line, e.g. through the power supply.
Quote from: HarryV on March 19, 2010, 01:59:58 PM
@Anyone
I asked my 'advisor' this:
> But the capacitor looks like it is in the wrong place to be a booster
> converter with or without a load.
> compare photo 2:
> http://tinyurl.com/ycw4xm4
>
> with operating principles
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boost_converter
his response:
The capacitor on your photo 2 is in parallel with the battery so it's
part of the converter's input supply. The capacitor in the operating
principles diagram of the wikipedia article is the converter's output
capacitor, which might as well not be there in steady state is there
is no load (once charged it just stays charged at a high voltage, and
the Boost's diode never conducts-- so the diode might as well not be
there either). So everything to the right of the switch in the boost
converter diagram could be removed in no load condition, that's why I
say the circuit operates like a Boost converter without a load. Which
explains why it steps up the input voltage, that's what Boost
converters do.
so is he correct in saying this is a boost converter without a load?
In my opinion: No. For one, the Supply as positioned in the wiki image is not needed for Luc's circuit.
Your 'adviser' knows by the way that the battery is disconnected after an initial cap charge?
--
NextGen67
deleted
Quote from: NextGen67 on March 19, 2010, 03:29:40 PM
In my opinion: No. For one, the Supply as positioned in the wiki image is not needed for Luc's circuit.
Your 'adviser' knows by the way that the battery is disconnected after an initial cap charge?
--
NextGen67
I think he does, and I bet he would say: after the cap is disconnected the voltage rise is due to leakage from the mosfet.
Sorry for the back and forth, but I know very very little about electronics and he is an EE so I can't really question his judgement.
Quote from: wings on March 19, 2010, 03:44:42 PM
Yes you can feel the pulse if put your finger on the toroid.
thanks,
so without the magnets the pulse sensation goes away?
Quote from: HarryV on March 19, 2010, 03:46:48 PM
I think he does, and I bet he would say: after the cap is disconnected the voltage rise is due to leakage from the mosfet.
In my circuit (which is not carefully tuned), the voltage on the cap decreases slowly, and after some hours it stops working. So there seems to be no significant leakage.
Quote from: NextGen67 on March 19, 2010, 03:29:40 PM
In my opinion: No. For one, the Supply as positioned in the wiki image is not needed for Luc's circuit.
Your 'adviser' knows by the way that the battery is disconnected after an initial cap charge?
--
NextGen67
Quote from: HarryV on March 19, 2010, 03:46:48 PM
I think he does, and I bet he would say: after the cap is disconnected the voltage rise is due to leakage from the mosfet.
Sorry for the back and forth, but I know very very little about electronics and he is an EE so I can't really question his judgement.
It's ok, I think your 'adviser' would be right with your bet. Ha maybe you ask again to confirm and see if your bet comes true.
Without the supply, the cap is not parallel with it anymore by the way [since it is not there], and the leakage from the mosfet is also not parallel with the Cap, at least not directly, but via the Gate, through the Drain.Hmm, which I just now realize poses something.... The leakage goes from the Gate through the Drain, and then through the 6.9 ohm coil resistance, and then back into the Cap.... The cap can -with correct tuning- gain charge.
Huh, I think it should be possible to calculate how much current is leaking when we can monitor the voltage raise over the cap during a few minute period [or better said, should be able to calculate how much current goes through the circuit]? The Caps are 3900uF each at how many volt? Ok... It's way to late here. I'll sleep first and tomorrow see what I can do. (It's actually early morning so to speak already haha).
--
NextGen67
FYI, Here's a great little oscillator.
Linear Technology's LTC1799 (5Khz-33MHZ)
Typically draws only 1ma from 5v Supply.
Requires only 1 external resistor and capacitor to set frequency.
Can be used as VCO.
http://cds.linear.com/docs/Datasheet/1799fbs.pdf
I should have asked this before, but could someone state the meaning of the letters G, D, and S in gotoluc circuit diagram?
G= gate
D= drain
S= source
IIRC = if I recall correctly
:)
@Harry
The letters refer to the wiring terminals (pinouts) on the MOSFET.
G-Gate
D-Drain
S-Source
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mosfet
@All
Here's a data point for transistor devices that better matches
the gotoluc coil system, I think. There seems to be a fairly
linear relationship between Rds and Ciss for all mosfets.
Tmos Device = VN0300L n-channel
Rds ohms max = 1.2
Id amps = 1.0
Vgs(th) min = 0.8
Vgs (th) max = 2.5
Vdss Volts = 60
Ciss pf Max = 100
Crss pf Max = 25
ton ns max = 30
toff ns max =30
case style TO-92
note: Rds = 1.2ohms is worse than .15ohms of IRF640
Ciss = 100pf is much better than 1560pf of IRF640
The question is how important is lower Rds to operation
of the overunity energy coil? Input gate AC power
is much less...Just a data point.
:S:MarkSCoffman
Hi everyone,
wow... you all have been working at this today. Thank you for all of your participation.
@MarkSCoffman, that is some massive calculations :o blow me away. How about you just ask me to do a specific test that would take less than 10 minutes and I can make a video of it. Just let me know.
I was able to get the CNY17-3 OPTO today and I tried it. What's left of the pulse signal at the mofet gate is very ugly :-\ @20KHz and has next to no pulse width (flat top). Much worse @30KHz. There is no way a signal like this will switch the mosfet correctly. The other problem is the 10K resistor across the gate and source to turn the mosfet off after the pulse. That alone consumes about 600 micro amps. at 20KHz let alone what the gate will be using. A higher value resistor makes the signal even worse. These cheap OPTO's is not the way to go. Mostly because a resistor is needed across the gate and source to make it work:P We need a better solution. I know you are all looking into it, so I'll wait till the verdict is out to buy more stuff.
I also picked up a CMOS 555. From what I can measure, it seems consumes 300 micro amps, so I'll play around with it and see what it can do.
Thanks for all your help and support as without all of you this would not be possible for me alone to do. If this circuit ends up being real! the credit will go to all who participate in developing it.
Luc
Maybe these work better ? :
http://pdf1.alldatasheet.com/datasheet-pdf/view/86240/IRF/PVI1050.html
I have only used them at low frequencies though, so there is no guarantee that they would perform better than ordinary optocouplers.
The safest way to get a high frequency would be the small sized audio transformer MOSFET gate control (fed with very low current) similar to how it´s done here (It might pose a new problem due to the new inductance though but maybe neglible):
Quote from: mscoffman on March 19, 2010, 08:48:17 PM
@All
Here's a data point for transistor devices that better matches
the gotoluc coil system, I think. There seems to be a fairly
linear relationship between Rds and Ciss for all mosfets.
Tmos Device = VN0300L n-channel
Rds ohms max = 1.2
Id amps = 1.0
Vgs(th) min = 0.8
Vgs (th) max = 2.5
Vdss Volts = 60
Ciss pf Max = 100
Crss pf Max = 25
ton ns max = 30
toff ns max =30
case style TO-92
note: Rds = 1.2ohms is worse than .15ohms of IRF640
Ciss = 100pf is much better than 1560pf of IRF640
The question is how important is lower Rds to operation
of the overunity energy coil? Input gate AC power
is much less...Just a data point.
:S:MarkSCoffman
Ha, I have to re-read your previous post a few times to digest what you wrote, but thanks for the info. Your calculations might need to be interpreted a bit lossy I guess because there was not really time to get good readings regarding Cap. Depending on what you saw on the video, with or without battery makes a lot of difference.
I think the most important part is to have the lowest Ciss, thus I would prefer a Ciss of 100pF with a Rds of 1.2 Ohm above a Ciss of 1560pF with a Rds of .15 ohmm.
I guess must take some time to find the most optimal type. There must be something available like Rds<0.5 Ohm / Ciss<100pF
The thing with the opto switch is that it uses a tremendous amount of energy (compared to a non opto fet). And actually, there is nothing bad with Gate leakage, as long as we can determine how much is leaking.
Suppose we run the fet from the Cap, then there is no worries about gate leakage, since the energy would come back in the same cap again.
The VN0300L has a higher Rds and Ciss tough, according to my data sheet (still pretty low).
Ohh for ALL who would know....
I am not good with non DC resistance thing's.. Is there a way to determine the resistance of his coil at say 35Khz [or rather at his optimum frequency] ?
--
NextGen67
@Luc,
Luc, just send you a PM, subject named: Tests...
Could you perform these for me when you got some time?
I forgot, what was voltage of your Caps? ( 2*3900uF at ? Volt. )
It might be better to include the cap value in the cleanup drawing of your circuit, as it *does* make a difference on your tuning frequency.
--
NextGen67
Quote from: mscoffman on March 19, 2010, 02:04:27 PM
Gotoluc’s Real Self Runner... Gentlemen: “Let us Compute!â€
The data used for the following calculations is taken from:
Self Running Coil Test #7 video â€" (Search for gotoluc on youtube.com)
Since we can’t experiment physically, we will do some theoretical
calculations.
<...>
The voltage on the bulk capacitors: = 16.64volts
Total size of the bulk capacitors = 2 x 3900uf = 7800uf
Approximated change rate in voltage on the bulk capacitors when circuit
is tuned taken from video #7 = 1/100 or .01volts per each (1) second.
<...>
:S:MarkSCoffman
MarkSCoffman,
On the moment Luc took off the battery, the circuit became in - less then optimal- tuning, because the overall LC has changed by taking out the batteries.
So the voltage reading going up you see on the meter is not as optimal as it could have been [then when the circuit was somehow re-tuned on the moment he took of the battery].
Look at time frame 08:49 of that video.. You see a reading of 0.000061 [most optimal tuned at this point]
Then he takes off the battery and we see the charge go up. However, take a look at time frame 09:08 [you might need to replay a few times there], and you find the reading has now become 0.000031 [about half what it was before], and not in optimal tune anymore [I assume].
Due to the battery missing impedance [when they were taken out], the circuit changed in performance. [In a fact, we could say that when the battery was attached, they were re-charging also.. at least the circuit tried to do such].
--
NextGen67
Quote from: gotoluc on March 19, 2010, 10:46:24 PM
Hi everyone,
wow... you all have been working at this today. Thank you for all of your participation.
@MarkSCoffman, that is some massive calculations :o blow me away. How about you just ask me to do a specific test that would take less than 10 minutes and I can make a video of it. Just let me know.
I was able to get the CNY17-3 OPTO today and I tried it. What's left of the pulse signal at the mofet gate is very ugly :-\ @20KHz and has next to no pulse width (flat top). Much worse @30KHz. There is no way a signal like this will switch the mosfet correctly. The other problem is the 10K resistor across the gate and source to turn the mosfet off after the pulse. That alone consumes about 600 micro amps. at 20KHz let alone what the gate will be using. A higher value resistor makes the signal even worse. These cheap OPTO's is not the way to go. Mostly because a resistor is needed across the gate and source to make it work:P We need a better solution. I know you are all looking into it, so I'll wait till the verdict is out to buy more stuff.
I also picked up a CMOS 555. From what I can measure, it seems consumes 300 micro amps, so I'll play around with it and see what it can do.
Thanks for all your help and support as without all of you this would not be possible for me alone to do. If this circuit ends up being real! the credit will go to all who participate in developing it.
Luc
Hi Luc,
First, I am sorry again I suggested the CNY17 opto for this task, as I wrote in the meantime but it must have been late. I owe you a beer or two.. :)
While I agree with the idea of using a MOSFET or a swithing device with much better parameters than the IRF640 (and here is another suggestion to a MOSFET type, use them both in parallel to reduce R
DS: http://www.vishay.com/docs/71434/si1026x.pdf )
Question still arises: how your circuit works? if there is resonance at the output side of the FET with the toroidal coil, then a FET with much less output capacitance could be tuned to resonance? surely it could but perhaps at a much higher frequency that might demand more input power (in switching circuit the higher the speed the higher the power demand gets, though this is nearly a linear dependence.)
I have been pondering on the following: let's say 4 pick up coils (optimized) could be used around the present toroidal coil and their individial outputs are summed up either in series or parallel or both. From this pickup power the CMOS 555 could be run.
Now by choosing a more preferred MOSFET type instead of the IRF640, the 1-2mW summed output from the pickup coils could already be enough juice for driving the gate source input, that would have less than 100pF input capacitance. This is what I think.
rgds, Gyula
PS Luc, what is the type of the CMOS 555, please? (LMC555 TLC555 ICM7555, else?)
Quote from: gyulasun on March 20, 2010, 09:18:34 AM
Hi Luc,
First, I am sorry again I suggested the CNY17 opto for this task, as I wrote in the meantime but it must have been late. I owe you a beer or two.. :)
While I agree with the idea of using a MOSFET or a swithing device with much better parameters than the IRF640 (and here is another suggestion to a MOSFET type, use them both in parallel to reduce RDS: http://www.vishay.com/docs/71434/si1026x.pdf )
Question still arises: how your circuit works? if there is resonance at the output side of the FET with the toroidal coil, then a FET with much less output capacitance could be tuned to resonance? surely it could but perhaps at a much higher frequency that might demand more input power (in switching circuit the higher the speed the higher the power demand gets, though this is nearly a linear dependence.)
I have been pondering on the following: let's say 4 pick up coils (optimized) could be used around the present toroidal coil and their individial outputs are summed up either in series or parallel or both. From this pickup power the CMOS 555 could be run.
Now by choosing a more preferred MOSFET type instead of the IRF640, the 1-2mW summed output from the pickup coils could already be enough juice for driving the gate source input, that would have less than 100pF input capacitance. This is what I think.
rgds, Gyula
PS Luc, what is the type of the CMOS 555, please?
Your suggestion to use the si1026x Mosfet [ http://www.vishay.com/docs/71434/si1026x.pdf ] and use them in parallel mode to reduce the R
DS seems like a perfect solution to me !
I would say forget about the optical one, and go for this instead. If easy available and not to costly, it is definitely worth to pursue :)
Gyula you think the eventual 4 pick-up coils would deliver enough energy to power the 555 circuit AND drive the si1026x ?
In such a case this would be a very good idea, as driving anything from the Cap tank is not preferred.
Luc, lets go for this if you can :)
*If* the 555 is able to work and drive the moset, while using energy from the pick-up coil(s), next would be to see what the 'new' optimal tuned frequency would be.
Once resonance is back and it seem to work, the 555 could be replaced with an specific designed low-current usage design, to minimize energy use from the pick-up coil(s).
Yes, this seems the way to go :-)
I am by the way not worried about the [eventually] higher resonance frequency.
--
NextGen67
Well, maybe finding the optimum pick up coils is the first now, I think what Luc temporarily uses is too long, the further end of the coil from the toroid can only receive much less juice, unfortunately. I think a size of his toroid core he uses now could serve as the size for multiturn pick up coils, including the thickness as the max lenght for the coil. And ALSO I repeat here: it would be definitely worth trying to use some small piece of ferrit core inside these pick up coils, to increse their useful self inductance, hence received induced power.
Re on the MOSFET type, at Newark the Si1026x is available for $ .206 apice but I do not know if there is a minimum order?
http://www.newark.com/jsp/search/results.jsp?N=0&Ntk=gensearch_001&Ntt=si1026&Ntx=mode+matchallpartial&suggestions=false&ref=globalsearch&_requestid=34014&isGoback=false&isRedirect=false
Here are other Vishay sources:
http://www.vishay.com/how/check-stock and enter: si1026*
The main input power to the IRF640 is needed for defeating its big input capacitance, and if any mW from the presently needed 15-16mW signal generator input could be reduced, it would be a bonus for sure.
Yes the higher operating frequency will not be the limiting factor, I mentioned it as a tendency.
rgds, Gyula
Quote from: gyulasun on March 20, 2010, 10:56:50 AM
Well, maybe finding the optimum pick up coils is the first now, I think what Luc temporarily uses is too long, the further end of the coil from the toroid can only receive much less juice, unfortunately. I think a size of his toroid core he uses now could serve as the size for multiturn pick up coils, including the thickness as the max lenght for the coil. And ALSO I repeat here: it would be definitely worth trying to use some small piece of ferrit core inside these pick up coils, to increse their useful self inductance, hence received induced power.
<...>
The main input power to the IRF640 is needed for defeating its big input capacitance, and if any mW from the presently needed 15-16mW signal generator input could be reduced, it would be a bonus for sure.
Yes the higher operating frequency will not be the limiting factor, I mentioned it as a tendency.
rgds, Gyula
I've send you a PM by the way Gyula, Subject: Normal Amp Draw?
A bonus indeed.. it would make more then 10mW difference !
Agreed, about the pick-up coil shape... And in his video's I saw some nice yellow colored toroid core laying around... It will be a few minute job to wind 2 halve coils on it [meaning 2 coils of each about 180 degrees... maybe make it 175 degrees].
Luc, could you try that? I would do only a single layer of not to thin awg to start with and see what it can pickup. In that way you have created 2 pick-up coils following the resonance coil quite well, and it would be easy to adjust.
If 4 pick-up coils in series would work, they would need to provide some 2,5 volt, or the 555 need more? The gate can operate with 2.5 volt I believe.
EDIT: I remember that Luc said any ferrite material going near his resonance coil destroy the effect... In such a case probably cannot use the toroid as core material... Ha, you might want to find something that has a similar shape... Optionally, you could drill out a circle of Plexiglass and drill a hole in the center and use that as core..;) [it is even a bit more 'flat', which might be better].
--
NextGen67
I detect energy levels are beginning to converge. ;)
For an experiment I would be interested in seeing
the maximum overunity gain measured two ways.
One time with a stopwatch while the voltage goes
from say 16.64Vdc to 17.64Vdc. The other would
null out the voltage change with a variable resistor.
Then measure the resistor setting with the DVM.
These things wouldn't take very long in a video
The other thing would be to build the NE555 cmos
timer circuit powered from dc derived from the reasonant
independent pickup coil. Have the NE555 output frequency
driving a 2nf capacitor to ground to see if you can get
to the required 10.94Vac pp. drive signal level of the
IRF640. (caution here)
Finally, I think you should purchase two IRF510 mosfets. Install
them in parallel in your experimental breadboard (easy) just install
them next to one another with all S,G,D's connected to each
other. Now you have a Fet with the following characteristics;
Rds = .20ohms (very similar to the IRF640) and Ciss= 2 x 135
= 270pf (4 times lower then IRF640). Now see what that will do
by tuning and measuring. I expect gate drive might be reduced
down to 3.0Vac pp! Now measure maximum overunity. One needs
to keep fingers crossed, that lower input drive is not the cause
of caps charging. Make overunity measurements. Then take one
of the parallel IRF510's away and re-tune and measure overunity
gain again... You probably will be driving like ~100 times less power
into the circuit from the signal generator. It makes the gate driver
look like 30->40Kohms equiv.
---
I wanted to summarize what I have said in previous
posts.
a) Use a series variable resistor on the gate of the
mosfet in tuning for maximum overunity gain in place
of the signal generator's output level control in case
its not available. Signal generator <-> opto only logical
use of opto.
b) Use a variable resistor to null-out the voltage gain
on the bulk capacitors after setting circuit overunity
gain to maximum rate. (better use a fixed resistor in
series with the variable) Measure the variable resistor
setting with a DVM. Lower resistance means better
overunity gain.
c) Find an “outlier†mosfet with spec sheet Ciss<200pf
And Rds<1.0ohm The lower both of these values are,
better...Found one, See below. This will lower the
drive voltage by up to ten times from the 10.94Vac
pp of IRF640 and lower transferable power even more.
Unfortunately if net overunity gain gets damaged you
won't be able to tell whether it’s due to the lower gate
power injection or the higher Rds, so keep one's fingers
crossed that the overunity gains seen is really overunity
energy.
Here is a mosfet that looks very promising;
IRF510; Ciss =135pf, Rds =0.4ohms <= try this!
As long as these parameters are correct and it is a mosfet
function forget the other parameters as they tend to trade
off except max Vds. Before doing anything check against any
stupid errors.
---
You can find all sorts of Web "calculators" for various electronic
equations on google. Just type the formal description of
what you want into google search then add the "calculator"
keyword.
impedance of inductance at frequency calculator
reasonant frequency of inductor and capacitor calculator
:MarkSCoffman
Quote from: e2matrix on March 19, 2010, 08:20:45 PM
G= gate
D= drain
S= source
IIRC = if I recall correctly
:)
thanks!
Quote from: NextGen67 link=topic=8892.msg233404#msg233404b] Without the supply, the cap is not parallel with it anymore by the way [since it is not there], and the leakage from the mosfet is also not parallel with the Cap, at least not directly, but via the Gate, through the Drain.[/b]
NextGen67
I am sorry to be a prick about this, but could you or someone draw the circuit without the battery, include the capacitor and make the power sources for the signal generator and mosfet explicit.
Quote from: gyulasun on March 20, 2010, 10:56:50 AM
Well, maybe finding the optimum pick up coils is the first now, I think what Luc temporarily uses is too long, the further end of the coil from the toroid can only receive much less juice, unfortunately. I think a size of his toroid core he uses now could serve as the size for multiturn pick up coils, including the thickness as the max length for the coil. And ALSO I repeat here: it would be definitely worth trying to use some small piece of ferrit core inside these pick up coils, to increase their useful self inductance, hence received induced power.
rgds, Gyula
@gyula
If you/we were designing a product I would agree about coil size but for
a voltage/current experimental pick-up intercepting more of a diminishing
mag field won't hurt. I agree with NexGen67 when you put ferrite into the
coil you begin moving the mag process we are trying to understand into
this coil! I might try this before I turned the power off to see if I was
missing anything really exciting, but otherwise it is not worth it, leaving
it running that way. You are trying to sneak it in, but the main circuit will
know. :)
By the way, some of those low inductance pancake coils look better
for instr. mag probes. Remember that a raw big coil resonates based
on it's self capacitance when unloaded or loaded only by scope
probes.
:S:MarkSCoffman
Luc,
Ha so there seem to be two choices of mosfet now.
Either the RF510; Ciss =135pf, Rds =0.4ohms
Or the si1026x; Ciss =60pf, Rds = 0.7ohms [the build in set combined]
Gyula was that in series or parallel? Also, could a 2nd si1026x be added, and by such create something like: 2* si1026x; Ciss =120pf, Rds = 0.35ohms [the build in sets combined] without having negative other things happening?
Now if we only could find a single one that has Ciss=<120pf, Rds=<0.35ohm
Anyhow, a little problem [for Luc] that could happen is that the frequency factor goes so far up that he might need to put his magnet closer to the coil... So Luc, if you go for any of the above mosfet types, and you can't get a good charge back [but still notice some effect], you probably would need to come closer with your magnet. You might having a hard time for a while finding the sweet spot back again.
--
NextGen67
Quote from: mscoffman on March 20, 2010, 01:49:37 PM
...
The vishay si1026 specs don't seem to measure up to
this one, unless I read it wrong.
Hi Mark,
If you study the data sheet: http://www.vishay.com/docs/71434/si1026x.pdf
Rds ohms max = 1.4
Id amps = .5
Vgs(th) min = 1
Vgs (th) max = 2.5
Vdss Volts = 60
Ciss pf Max = 30
Crss pf Max = 3
ton ns max = 15
toff ns max = 20
And these data are for a single device and I suggested using two in parallel because they are manufactured as double devices in a single SC89 SMD case. NextGen has just mentioned using two such SMD cases also in parallel, which would mean 4 single MOSFET in parallel, this would still have about 120pF input capacitance but Rds would be about .35 Ohm.
Folks, another notice from me: On using some piece of core in the pick up coils I meant a rod shape like a ferrite rod piece, not toroidal shape, ok?
And for the pick up coil I also meant a cylindrical, multiturn, multilayer but short coil, ok?
I understand also if the presence of any core near to the toroidal coil would detune it, then there remains using multiturn air core coils of course.
rgds, Gyula
Luc,
from your video is evident the difficulty to tune to the resonance.
A suggestion is to use the output coil ... check the maximum voltage and frequency spectra using the oscilloscope.
It is possible to control the frequency directly by this coil in order to have stable max output?
Other possibility insert a piezo sensor (from piezo microphone or buzzer) between the magnet and coil.
Yes, Nextgen76 and gyulasun these all sound like reasonable solutions.
I was not thinking of running transistor device in parallel in a working
experiment but that could work. My thinking was edge down the path
of reducing Ciss to some extent seeing if we maintain overunity then
reduce it even more while letting Rds rise slightly to see if Rds is even
important. We may or may not get overunity energy but we should get
some answers. If conservation of energy holds fast we will simply be
exchanging one set of question for another set, but I don't expect that.
What I think may be happening is most of the coil magnetic lines bypass
the not yet fully saturated toroid core, but the ones that do displace
some field lines anchored in the magnets...those displaced field lines
of the magnets may be overunity ones
I was really surprised at the spread of Ciss in mosfets. I saw one that
was 6700pf...These are pure DCV current switching devices. Some have
Rds =1milliohm .001ohms! These switching applications can withstand
the high Ciss gate values because they are behaving like lightswitches.
Internally they are bunches of on-chip mosfet devices in parallel.
:S:MarkSCoffman
Hi :S:MarkSCoffman,
That is fine I agree. I think the Rds value is an issue too because it is directly in series with the toroidal coil and you can consider it as if it were part of the coil wire resistance, causing loss. In Luc's present circuit the less than .1 Ohm or so Rds value is very nicely negligible wrt his coil's nearly 7 Ohms copper resistance, meaning the loss on the drain-source path is very low.
On the Ciss issue: yes, from the manufacturing process it comes that Ciss goes up to as high as 6-7nF when the Rds is wanted in the milliOhm range, a result of parallel connections inside the case.
rgds, Gyula
Quote from: NextGen67 on March 19, 2010, 02:59:40 PM
HarryV,
You are right in a way.
If the core have a reaction, then the magnet has its counter reaction, I was not clear enough in my idea... What I tried to point out is that the effect we seem to have [the pick-up coils having no influence on the input energy] is caused by the core its domains [and not the magnet vibrating itself].
If you 'tight up' the magnet and the coil together, so that the motion of the magnet is very restricted, this would have a better outcome for the mentioned effect. I do not want to go to deep into this, because it might open a lot of side way argumentation, which would be not a good idea for the progress of Luc's work;)
However, I hope to make it clear what I mentioned before.
Note that this is based on Luc his pick-up coil position, in which he says that the position he found is the best place for optimal receiving of energy.
--
NextGen67
Well, I think luc's effect requires the motion of the magnets because the motion of the magnets induces a current in the coil. If I am right clamping the magnets will reduce the effect.
Otherwise I don't see how the rotation of the domains by themselves could lead to overunity.
The question is does the energy required for rotation equal or exceed the energy of the induced current due to the motion of the magnets. If it does, then it is not overunity.
Quote from: NextGen67 on March 19, 2010, 07:59:40 PM
HarryV,
You are right in a way.
If the core have a reaction, then the magnet has its counter reaction, I was not clear enough in my idea... What I tried to point out is that the effect we seem to have [the pick-up coils having no influence on the input energy] is caused by the core its domains [and not the magnet vibrating itself].
If you 'tight up' the magnet and the coil together, so that the motion of the magnet is very restricted, this would have a better outcome for the mentioned effect. I do not want to go to deep into this, because it might open a lot of side way argumentation, which would be not a good idea for the progress of Luc's work;)
However, I hope to make it clear what I mentioned before.
Note that this is based on Luc his pick-up coil position, in which he says that the position he found is the best place for optimal receiving of energy.
--
NextGen67
Quote from: HarryV on March 20, 2010, 06:04:09 PM
Well, I think luc's effect requires the motion of the magnets because the motion of the magnets induces a current in the coil. If I am right clamping the magnets will reduce the effect.
Otherwise I don't see how the rotation of the domains by themselves could lead to overunity.
The question is does the energy required for rotation equal or exceed the energy of the induced current due to the motion of the magnets. If it does, then it is not overunity.
Hmm, I'll keep it short. Would the motion of the magnet not require energy? I mean swapping it back and forth can't be done for nothing... So imagine you clamp the magnet to the coil, and effectively prohibit physical movement of the coil... Now there happens some kind of pressure, since the fields still try to push each other of. Now if the magnet is tight and can't move, what happens with the energy that normally moved it? The magnet won't give way.. and *what* is actually pushing this magnet *what* caused the field that seems to push against the magnet.
--
NextGen67
magnetic field has INERTIA, because nothing can react faster then light
push magnet field ,disconnect power source but connect LC circuit alone (caps and coils), magnetic field respond generating energy excess in LC circuit
apparently because battery was removed then this circuit has potential to push magnetic field of magnet with synchronization with LC resonance.
Like a child on swing.If inductance is not rigid then energy is amplified.
how this circuit is GROUNDED ? electrons may be moving from ground
How To Build Solid-State Electrical Over-Unity Devices, http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=downloads;sa=downfile&id=380
The purpose of this paper is to present the "hidden" mechanism that is at work in these devices which causes them to produce excess electrical energy.
GB
Quote from: gravityblock on March 20, 2010, 07:43:30 PM
How To Build Solid-State Electrical Over-Unity Devices, http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=downloads;sa=downfile&id=380
The purpose of this paper is to present the "hidden" mechanism that is at work in these devices which causes them to produce excess electrical energy.
GB
When I click the link I am asked to logged in when I am already logged in. whats up with that?
Quote from: NextGen67 on March 20, 2010, 03:30:13 PM
Luc,
Ha so there seem to be two choices of mosfet now.
Either the RF510; Ciss =135pf, Rds =0.4ohms
Or the si1026x; Ciss =60pf, Rds = 0.7ohms [the build in set combined]
Gyula was that in series or parallel? Also, could a 2nd si1026x be added, and by such create something like: 2* si1026x; Ciss =120pf, Rds = 0.35ohms [the build in sets combined] without having negative other things happening?
Now if we only could find a single one that has Ciss=<120pf, Rds=<0.35ohm
Anyhow, a little problem [for Luc] that could happen is that the frequency factor goes so far up that he might need to put his magnet closer to the coil... So Luc, if you go for any of the above mosfet types, and you can't get a good charge back [but still notice some effect], you probably would need to come closer with your magnet. You might having a hard time for a while finding the sweet spot back again.
NextGen67
Quote from: gyulasun on March 20, 2010, 04:03:07 PM
If you study the data sheet: http://www.vishay.com/docs/71434/si1026x.pdf
Rds ohms max = 1.4
Id amps = .5
Vgs(th) min = 1
Vgs (th) max = 2.5
Vdss Volts = 60
Ciss pf Max = 30
Crss pf Max = 3
ton ns max = 15
toff ns max = 20
And these data are for a single device and I suggested using two in parallel because they are manufactured as double devices in a single SC89 SMD case. NextGen has just mentioned using two such SMD cases also in parallel, which would mean 4 single MOSFET in parallel, this would still have about 120pF input capacitance but Rds would be about .35 Ohm.
rgds, Gyula
---
another selection:
STMicroelectronics STS2DNF30L, Dual transistor Surface mount SO-8
each transistor;
Ciss = 121pf, Rds(on) Static drain-source on resistance = 0.09ohms
Quote from: mscoffman on March 20, 2010, 08:15:53 PM
---
another selection:
STMicroelectronics STS2DNF30L, Dual transistor Surface mount SO-8
each transistor;
Ciss = 121pf, Rds(on) Static drain-source on resistance = 0.09ohms
mscoffman, Very good :)
Vds 30V
Vdgr 30v
Vgs 18v
Vgs 2.5v max
Rds 0.15ohm max [0.09 typ]
Ciss 121pf
Coss 45pf
Crss 11pf
Data sheet attached.
--
NextGen67
Quote from: HarryV on March 20, 2010, 07:56:56 PM
When I click the link I am asked to logged in when I am already logged in. whats up with that?
There has been 8 downloads of this file so far. The problem may be on your end or a temporary issue with the server. Maybe try to log out, then log back in. If the problem persists, then you can view or download the file on Scribd,
http://www.scribd.com/doc/25248289/How-to-Build-Solid-State-Electrical-Over-Unity-DevicesIf you have any additional problems, send me a PM and I'll send the file to you. Thanks for bringing this to my attention.
GB
Quote from: gotoluc on March 18, 2010, 11:29:43 PM
Hi all,
here is a new video demonstrating a pickup coil and a LED as load.
Link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bgPR9r14zWE
Luc
Hi Luc,
I gather the material to make a replica of your experience ;D
But until now, it seems that I can't make the necessary adjustments to succeed ???
Would it be possible to make a video of the steps to adjust the
frequency,
duty cycle,
voltage,
space between the coil and magnet ... etc...
And of course to show your connections to your measuring devices (capacitor bank at the back with the precision 1 ohm resistor ... this part hasen't been clearly filmed).
Thanks,
LightRider
Having taken a close look at Luc's scope shots [the non tuned and tuned ones], it clearly seems to show some capacitive effects at the begin of the ON pulse [see below enlarged image fragments].
For the NON tuned scope shot:
Instead of the vertical rise and then horizontal line we would normally see in a square wave, this one is like
1) Rise (normal - start of ON signal)
2) Horizontal, but below max amplitude [ capacitance effect ?]
3) Slope up [ capacitance effect, the capacitance seems NON fixed here ?]
4) Horizontal line (normal)
5) Fall (normal - end of ON signal)
This effect takes roughly some 14+17 = 31 percent of the ON phase. It is likely that this is caused by the capacitive properties of the FET. I have no good explanation yet as of *why* the capacitance effect is build out of 2 parts [one(1) the horizontal below max amplitude, the other a slope up to max amplitude], but this might have to do with the FET's switch on technique used].
Note that the end part of the ON signal [the fall] looks rather as what would normally expect [thus no capacitance effects happening here], and this could be explained by the fact that since the energy to from the signal generator wend off, the capacitance of the FET is 'virtually' not there anymore [the capacitance is only there when the FET is in operation modes].
The 'fine tuning' [getting optimal resonance frequency], seems to have particular strong effects on *this* part of the ON signal. ( See some posts back where I posted Luc's non tuned and tuned scope shot, but with the yellow trace inverted and moved over the green one, to make the difference clear between non tuned and tuned ).
When a better type FET is used [one with the lowest possible Ciss] the 'length' of this effect will become much smaller and thus less important... It actually would make tuning more easy, since *exact* matching becomes a less important factor.
Also, with the better type fet, it seem appear to me that the 'charge back' factor [charging up the Cap bank] would *increase* , which is of course a good thing.
As for the TUNED scope shot,
You can clearly notice that step 2 and 3 mentioned above are 'corrected' by Luc, by having an *exact* tuned frequency.
in my earlier posted scope shots [the one with the red circles], the difference is pointed out, and one can see that the non tuned one has a mismatch, and this shows *why* the cap is unable to charge up [loss of energy, due to frequency tuning mismatch].
So, basically the FET capacitance is *NOT* really so important for the charge back (since only some 31 percent [less then 3 percent! with the correct FET] are accounting for the frequency 'mismatch'
Later on [when the better type FET is used], new scope shots like these could actually give some indications as for *where* the charge back is coming from.
also, with the new type FET, the tuning will have *more* effectiveness because the tuning part could *never* 'correct' the slope [step 3] part totally, because it is a variance capacitance there[that also is why there is a little ring signal afterward]. this slope part is almost totally removed with the new type FET, thus *more* effectiveness for he tuned frequency [thus *more* charge back].
A side note for the Cap bank charging.... Although you see Luc's meter gaining upwards very quickly, the actual charge going into the Cap is still at the very low border... Charging happens with some 62.4 uA, and if my calculations are correct, this will translate in some 0.005 mW. This will become slightly better -hopefully- with the new FET, and if after all this we still get the charging effect, the resonance coil could be tweaked for lower ohmic resistance.
P.S.: At the end of the ON signal [the fall] it shows a rather *non* direct decay at the last 20 to 25 percent of the fall edge... what effect is responsible for causing this ?
--
NextGen67
Now i have 2 different coils (one with 315 mH (1 layer), the other with 2480 mH (3 layers) combined inductance).
But i'm not able to replicate any of the interesting effects. :(
There is no clearly visible resonant frequency. I tried it with frequencies from 100 Hz up to more than 100 kHz. I looked at the voltage measured across one half of the coil. It changes it's shape (sometimes it's more rectangular, sometimes it looks more than one half of a sine wave) and it changes also its magnitude but only slightly.
The voltage measured across the 1 ohm resistor is generally very low. With 5 mV/div resolution of my scope i can barely see any differences.
Also the magnet has no visible effects. It reduces the inductance only slightly (about half the value measured without magnet) although it's a very strong neo magnet (N48, 10 mm diameter x 10 mm).
Maybe the ferrite core is not suitable to see the effects. I don't know. But i'm not motivated to make dozens of new coils with other cores to try this out. :-[
Quote from: skywatcher on March 21, 2010, 07:57:53 AM
Now i have 2 different coils (one with 315 mH (1 layer), the other with 2480 mH (3 layers) combined inductance).
But i'm not able to replicate any of the interesting effects. :(
There is no clearly visible resonant frequency. I tried it with frequencies from 100 Hz up to more than 100 kHz. I looked at the voltage measured across one half of the coil. It changes it's shape (sometimes it's more rectangular, sometimes it looks more than one half of a sine wave) and it changes also its magnitude but only slightly.
The voltage measured across the 1 ohm resistor is generally very low. With 5 mV/div resolution of my scope i can barely see any differences.
Also the magnet has no visible effects. It reduces the inductance only slightly (about half the value measured without magnet) although it's a very strong neo magnet (N48, 10 mm diameter x 10 mm).
Maybe the ferrite core is not suitable to see the effects. I don't know. But i'm not motivated to make dozens of new coils with other cores to try this out. :-[
Similar result on my side :( ???
LightRider
Hi Skywatcher,
Here is what I would do:
use the 315mH coil
Try to use 25V DC supply or so (because your BUZ11 has an output capacitance of 750pF at Vds=25V
Give 10.5kHz input pulse frequency to the gate source from your freq source because the 315mH resonates with the 750pF about that frequency, see: http://www.whatcircuits.com/lc-resonance-frequency-calculator/ (http://www.whatcircuits.com/lc-resonance-frequency-calculator/)
and data sheet for your FET: http://skory.gylcomp.hu/alkatresz/buz11.pdf (http://skory.gylcomp.hu/alkatresz/buz11.pdf)
Of course you wish to sweep the frequency up and down near the 10kHZ frequency because there is no garantie for your FET to have just 750pF at 25V.
You may repeat this procedure with the other coil, just use the near correct values. If you do not have a variable power supply, use one or two batteries in series and estimate the output capacitance from the data sheet, (Coss in Fig. 10).
EDIT: With the magnets on, you have to measure the mH value of the coil to bring the circuit readily into resonance. Otherwise, much trial and error as Luc found.
rgds, Gyula
EDIT: if you measure with the scope between the drain source, you have to see amplitude increase at or near resonance, together with the waveform becoming nearly sinusoidal (input is square wave).
My cap (120000 uF) is only rated 15 V. So i can not go up to 25 V with this one.
I have found a 33 uF film cap (250 V). Maybe i can try this one.
@Gyula,
Send you a PM again.. you should see it :-)
--
NextGen67
Quote from: skywatcher on March 21, 2010, 09:42:41 AM
My cap (120000 uF) is only rated 15 V. So i can not go up to 25 V with this one.
I have found a 33 uF film cap (250 V). Maybe i can try this one.
Skywatcher,
You still have your previous [somewhat working one] intact?
--
NextGen67
Quote from: NextGen67 on March 21, 2010, 09:55:04 AM
Skywatcher,
You still have your previous [somewhat working one] intact?
--
NextGen67
Yes...
I wonder why the magnet has such a low impact on the inductance. Maybe the permeability of the core is too low.
Quote from: skywatcher on March 21, 2010, 10:36:07 AM
Yes...
I wonder why the magnet has such a low impact on the inductance. Maybe the permeability of the core is too low.
yes, your core material and magnet do not match up.
You did not time exactly how long it 'ran' last time - right? You may want to give it another try with that [working] one, and time how long it keeps going. After that, try to clamp your magnet a bit to the coil, so that its movement get strongly restricted [you may need to re-tune the frequency after that a bit], and 'run' it again... sere how long it can run now.... If I'm right [and you re-tuned correctly], your 2nd run should be longer :)
Also, be sure to have NO metallic objects in near vicinity.
--
NextGen67
Quote from: skywatcher on March 21, 2010, 07:57:53 AM
Also the magnet has no visible effects. It reduces the inductance only slightly (about half the value measured without magnet) although it's a very strong neo magnet (N48, 10 mm diameter x 10 mm).
Maybe the ferrite core is not suitable to see the effects. I don't know. But i'm not motivated to make dozens of new coils with other cores to try this out. :-[
Quote from: skywatcher on March 21, 2010, 09:42:41 AM
My cap (120000 uF) is only rated 15 V. So i can not go up to 25 V with this one.
@skywatcher
I think, there was a video of the measurement of the toroid coil with
and without the magnet stack right at the surface of the coil. The
measurement were 1040mh [without] and 44mheneries [with]. I would
submit that this nearly 25 times difference represents the action of a high
performance ferrite material possibly traceable to Metglass. I also notice
sometimes the gotoluc diagrams are showing lines like the toroid may
be split by small gaps into halves. That also might make a difference.
So I don't think I would attempt duplicating this experiment until I got
measurements somewhat similar to his or else could invalidate, correct
or explain what was shown with a coil at least somewhat similar to his.
Yours sounds like what I might expect, maybe low, but his values
seem extraordinary. I've heard that metglass material is like this.
---
You don't happen to have two of these 120Kuf capacitors do you? 8)
If so...place them in series...According to theory, equal
values of series capacitors divide their capacitance by
two so you have 60Kuf and they would split the Q charge,
so the working voltage of the two combined would be
doubled to 30Volts.
When I was using them I would check to see, once in a while,
that they were dividing the sum of the DC voltage between
them equally, and not continue if they were not. (due to
unbalanced DC leakage current, and unbalanced delta C)
:S:MarkSCoffman
Quote from: NextGen67 on March 21, 2010, 10:47:01 AM
You did not time exactly how long it 'ran' last time - right? You may want to give it another try with that [working] one, and time how long it keeps going. After that, try to clamp your magnet a bit to the coil, so that its movement get strongly restricted [you may need to re-tune the frequency after that a bit], and 'run' it again... sere how long it can run now.... If I'm right [and you re-tuned correctly], your 2nd run should be longer :)
At the moment, i can not even replicate the 'long' runtime o got last Friday. I don't know exactly how long it was running then, but today it's much less.
QuoteAlso, be sure to have NO metallic objects in near vicinity.
That's not possible. If you look at Luc's videos, there are also plenty of metallic objects...
Quote from: mscoffman on March 21, 2010, 10:51:04 AM
I think, there was a video of the measurement of the toroid coil with
and without the magnet stack right at the surface of the coil. The
measurement were 1040mh [without] and 44mheneries [with]. I would
submit that this nearly 25 times difference represents the action of a high
performance ferrite material possibly traceable to Metglass.
Yes, that's possible. I have a similar material, so maybe i will try to use it.
@Luc,
Could you give me a conclusion? I need to confirm something...
Could you remove [as in physically take it away] your pick-up coil for a while and tune your circuit is most optimal state. Once you have that, place your Pick-up coil back again, but do *not* put a load on it.
If my thinking is correct, your circuit became now in an *de-tuned* state ! - Could you confirm that for me?
Also, you will [easily] be able to bring your circuit back in resonance again, by *lowering* your frequency slightly [I'm not to sure if it is lowering, but I think is it lowering]. - Could you confirm this is also true ?
Now when you place a load on the Pick-up coil [or short circuit it] you should *not* see any negative effects on your circuit as in cap de-charge, or de-tuning effects. - Could you confirm this is also true ? [***]
If you have an extra magnet laying around (such a small round one): if you have your circuit is perfect tuned state, and you add [stack] the small magnet at the end of the others, your circuit will become *de-tuned* and you can re-tune it back again, by *increasing* the frequency a bit. - Can you confirm this is true ?
Ok, that is it :-)
I've analyzed your scope shots, and it appears to me that I understand what is going on. Your pick-up coil can be greatly improved by making full use of all available energy available on that side.. you will need a tubercular coil, so it can 'pick-up' all available energy along the Z-ax. Also this solves the number of pick-up coils to just *one* with a better effective factor. If you have a 'sniffer' to look around where you have still good M-fields, you can take that factor as outer width for your coil.
[***] It *is* possible that if you put a NON resistive load on the pickup coil, it *could* have negative effects on the rest of your circuit, but [if true] these can be fixed.
--
NextGen67
Quote from: skywatcher on March 21, 2010, 11:01:15 AM
<...>
QuoteAlso, be sure to have NO metallic objects in near vicinity.
That's not possible. If you look at Luc's videos, there are also plenty of metallic objects...
:) I mean *near*.
I hope you can get the better running time back again!
About those core material, In Luc's video I saw a pair or so of those yellow cores? Don't they have any markers on them giving and indication of what they might be, or a fabric mark or so?
Note also that Luc used much weaker Grade N35 magnets.
if you see JLN site: http://jnaudin.free.fr/2SGen/indexen.htm#hysteresis (http://jnaudin.free.fr/2SGen/indexen.htm#hysteresis) , and look at the 'NO MAGNET' and 'WITH MAGNET' pictures, that is what you may want to get, *but* the 'with magnet' should leave some space and not totally have a flat hysteresis [because you will going to put some energy in the coil still], however, this 'little bit' is as of now still trial and error yet.
--
NextGen67
Quote from: NextGen67 on March 20, 2010, 07:01:23 PM
Hmm, I'll keep it short. Would the motion of the magnet not require energy? I mean swapping it back and forth can't be done for nothing... So imagine you clamp the magnet to the coil, and effectively prohibit physical movement of the coil... Now there happens some kind of pressure, since the fields still try to push each other of. Now if the magnet is tight and can't move, what happens with the energy that normally moved it? The magnet won't give way.. and *what* is actually pushing this magnet *what* caused the field that seems to push against the magnet.
--
The spacer between the coil and the magnet provides the push. You can think of the spacer as a kind of spring. It gets compressed slightly by the magnet when the pulse is off due to the magnets attraction to the core. The spacer expands when the pulse is on because the core's attractiveness is reduced. See my attached
concept diagram. The magnet placement and the flatter coil help to maximise the difference in attraction between the on and off states. (edited)
Quote from: HarryV on March 21, 2010, 12:08:18 PM
--
The spacer between the coil and the magnet provides the push. You can think of the spacer as a kind of spring. It gets compressed slightly by the magnet when the pulse is off due to the magnets attraction to the core. The spacer expands when the pulse is on because the core's attractiveness is reduced. See my attached concept diagram. The magnet placement and the flatter coil help to maximise the difference in attraction between the on and off states. (edited)
You realize that the energy to vibrate the magnet is coming from what *we* put into it - right? And since it takes *work* to do the displacement of the magnet, we lose energy with it by such. The energy you receive from the magnet 'vibrate back' to the coil, is put in by *us* in the first place to 'vibrate away' it, and since it took *work*, what comes back is *less* than what we did put in in the first place.
Quotebecause the core's attractiveness is reduced.
Which is because *WE* fed it with the energy to do so.
So, when the 'core's attractiveness is not reduced' anymore, you think that then we will receive a gain in energy, because the magnet *would* inject energy [by moving back to the core again]... But this energy is the one that is has *cost* us to make it less attractive in the first place [minus the losses, because *work* has done]. See what you have achieved as a temporary storage... you store something, and then a little later you receive it back again [minus some energy because it has cost some of that to do the *work* to enable storage].
Instead now look at it like this:
Imagine this: You push hard against a 500Kg stone and the stone does not move [because it is to heavy]... The *work* done [you pushing], *must* go *somewhere*.... Would it in fact not be *you* who would move instead ? ... Ok, now translate this fact back to the magnet and core ;)
Look at the scope shot I included earlier, and find the places where the magnet *would* 'vibrate up' , and places where it *would* 'vibrate back'.... Interesting isn't it?
Besides the bump, between the up and down '*would be* movement' of the magnet (along it's time line), where it *would be* coming down till it finally is back in start position [the horizontal duty cycle length part, off phase now!], see what is happening there in the scope shot? Even more interesting.. isn't it.... *
that* is where the 0.005 mW seems to come from.
The scope shot I refer to: http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=8892.msg233528#msg233528 (http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=8892.msg233528#msg233528)
Edit: This might also explain *why* it is so extremely important to have the *exact* [well as exact as possible] 'tuning' for the resonance... Because if the magnet it's *would be* movement was not *exactly* in line with the coils behavior, there would be no gain [which is clearly happening as Luc shows when he de-tunes the coil].
Edit2:QuoteThe question is does the energy required for rotation equal or exceed the energy of the induced current due to the motion of the magnets. If it does, then it is not overunity.
Well, I'm a bit reluctant to say it so bluntly, but yes, looking at the scope picture, it has -to me- undeniable AE properties -very small- but nevertheless there ! (as a side note, even more remarkably the same as Steorns one!... it is a copy actually time line wise seen).(I use the term AE[Additional Energy] instead of OU, meaning OU=energy from nowhere, thus created, while AE comes from *somewhere* other than what we fed into the device)
--
NextGen67
Quote from: forest on March 20, 2010, 07:33:06 PM
how this circuit is GROUNDED ? electrons may be moving from ground
Normally it was not grounded but as I suggested this to Luc as a way that might increase current flow he did try it but said it made no difference. I'm planning on trying it with a ground as I had read in a circuit over 20 KHz it might add to the current flow. Easy enough to try an Earth ground.
Quote from: NextGen67 on March 20, 2010, 05:52:32 AM
@Luc,
Luc, just send you a PM, subject named: Tests...
Could you perform these for me when you got some time?
I forgot, what was voltage of your Caps? ( 2*3900uF at ? Volt. )
It might be better to include the cap value in the cleanup drawing of your circuit, as it *does* make a difference on your tuning frequency.
--
NextGen67
Hi NextGen67,
let me know what test you want done.
The capacitors are 3900uf - 400vdc
Luc
Hi everyone,
I had a little free time while my son is visiting his mother and made a new video.
However, it's not showing any over unity :(
Sorry :-[ this may not be what we were hoping for :-\
Let me know if I'm missing something.
Luc
Link to video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c7CsBr7ouPE
Quote from: gyulasun on March 20, 2010, 09:18:34 AM
Hi Luc,
First, I am sorry again I suggested the CNY17 opto for this task, as I wrote in the meantime but it must have been late. I owe you a beer or two.. :)
While I agree with the idea of using a MOSFET or a swithing device with much better parameters than the IRF640 (and here is another suggestion to a MOSFET type, use them both in parallel to reduce RDS: http://www.vishay.com/docs/71434/si1026x.pdf )
Question still arises: how your circuit works? if there is resonance at the output side of the FET with the toroidal coil, then a FET with much less output capacitance could be tuned to resonance? surely it could but perhaps at a much higher frequency that might demand more input power (in switching circuit the higher the speed the higher the power demand gets, though this is nearly a linear dependence.)
I have been pondering on the following: let's say 4 pick up coils (optimized) could be used around the present toroidal coil and their individial outputs are summed up either in series or parallel or both. From this pickup power the CMOS 555 could be run.
Now by choosing a more preferred MOSFET type instead of the IRF640, the 1-2mW summed output from the pickup coils could already be enough juice for driving the gate source input, that would have less than 100pF input capacitance. This is what I think.
rgds, Gyula
PS Luc, what is the type of the CMOS 555, please? (LMC555 TLC555 ICM7555, else?)
Hi Gyula,
the new CMOS 555 I got is a TLC555CP.
It is what I used in the new test 10 video I just posted above.
Luc
Quote from: mscoffman on March 20, 2010, 01:49:37 PM
I detect energy levels are beginning to converge. ;)
For an experiment I would be interested in seeing
the maximum overunity gain measured two ways.
One time with a stopwatch while the voltage goes
from say 16.64Vdc to 17.64Vdc. The other would
null out the voltage change with a variable resistor.
Then measure the resistor setting with the DVM.
These things wouldn't take very long in a video
The other thing would be to build the NE555 cmos
timer circuit powered from dc derived from the reasonant
independent pickup coil. Have the NE555 output frequency
driving a 2nf capacitor to ground to see if you can get
to the required 10.94Vac pp. drive signal level of the
IRF640. (caution here)
Finally, I think you should purchase two IRF510 mosfets. Install
them in parallel in your experimental breadboard (easy) just install
them next to one another with all S,G,D's connected to each
other. Now you have a Fet with the following characteristics;
Rds = .20ohms (very similar to the IRF640) and Ciss= 2 x 135
= 270pf (4 times lower then IRF640). Now see what that will do
by tuning and measuring. I expect gate drive might be reduced
down to 3.0Vac pp! Now measure maximum overunity. One needs
to keep fingers crossed, that lower input drive is not the cause
of caps charging. Make overunity measurements. Then take one
of the parallel IRF510's away and re-tune and measure overunity
gain again... You probably will be driving like ~100 times less power
into the circuit from the signal generator. It makes the gate driver
look like 30->40Kohms equiv.
---
I wanted to summarize what I have said in previous
posts.
a) Use a series variable resistor on the gate of the
mosfet in tuning for maximum overunity gain in place
of the signal generator's output level control in case
its not available. Signal generator <-> opto only logical
use of opto.
b) Use a variable resistor to null-out the voltage gain
on the bulk capacitors after setting circuit overunity
gain to maximum rate. (better use a fixed resistor in
series with the variable) Measure the variable resistor
setting with a DVM. Lower resistance means better
overunity gain.
c) Find an “outlier†mosfet with spec sheet Ciss<200pf
And Rds<1.0ohm The lower both of these values are,
better...Found one, See below. This will lower the
drive voltage by up to ten times from the 10.94Vac
pp of IRF640 and lower transferable power even more.
Unfortunately if net overunity gain gets damaged you
won't be able to tell whether it’s due to the lower gate
power injection or the higher Rds, so keep one's fingers
crossed that the overunity gains seen is really overunity
energy.
Here is a mosfet that looks very promising;
IRF510; Ciss =135pf, Rds =0.4ohms <= try this!
As long as these parameters are correct and it is a mosfet
function forget the other parameters as they tend to trade
off except max Vds. Before doing anything check against any
stupid errors.
---
You can find all sorts of Web "calculators" for various electronic
equations on google. Just type the formal description of
what you want into google search then add the "calculator"
keyword.
impedance of inductance at frequency calculator
reasonant frequency of inductor and capacitor calculator
:MarkSCoffman
Thanks Mark for the details in making a more efficient switch.
I will buy some IRF510 now
Luc
Hi Luc,
Mark also found an even better type:
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=8892.msg233538#msg233538
And it is at newark.com:
http://www.newark.com/jsp/search/results.jsp?N=0&Ntk=gensearch_001&Ntt=STS2DNF30&Ntx=mode+matchallpartial&suggestions=false&ref=globalsearch&_requestid=114222&isGoback=false&isRedirect=false
MAybe it would be worth trying too.
Thanks for the new video, I am surprised you found using a second pick up coil already reflects back to the tank circuit?
rgds, Gyula
Quote from: HarryV on March 21, 2010, 12:08:18 PM
--
The spacer between the coil and the magnet provides the push. You can think of the spacer as a kind of spring. It gets compressed slightly by the magnet when the pulse is off due to the magnets attraction to the core ...
Great !
To me, it makes perfect sense.
And it opens a good field for optimizations, i think, regarding the spacer's material.
In my imagination, It would require a material with a good shape memory and superelasticity.
As an orthodontist, i instantly thought of nickel-titanium (Ni-Ti), or nitinol alloys.
http://herkules.oulu.fi/isbn9514252217/html/x317.html
As far as i know, but not entirely sure, this alloy is non ferro magnetic.
It would not be expensive or hard to make spacers with a small acrylic disc holding 4 or more small 0.012 wires as "legs", providing an spring effect.
The choice of material could provide better amplitude on magnets micro movements, optimizing it's work.
Just my 2 cents.
Hope it sounds not too much stupid :)
Men, please keep this great work.
Quote from: skywatcher on March 21, 2010, 07:57:53 AM
Now i have 2 different coils (one with 315 mH (1 layer), the other with 2480 mH (3 layers) combined inductance).
But i'm not able to replicate any of the interesting effects. :(
There is no clearly visible resonant frequency. I tried it with frequencies from 100 Hz up to more than 100 kHz. I looked at the voltage measured across one half of the coil. It changes it's shape (sometimes it's more rectangular, sometimes it looks more than one half of a sine wave) and it changes also its magnitude but only slightly.
The voltage measured across the 1 ohm resistor is generally very low. With 5 mV/div resolution of my scope i can barely see any differences.
Also the magnet has no visible effects. It reduces the inductance only slightly (about half the value measured without magnet) although it's a very strong neo magnet (N48, 10 mm diameter x 10 mm).
Maybe the ferrite core is not suitable to see the effects. I don't know. But i'm not motivated to make dozens of new coils with other cores to try this out. :-[
Wow :o skywatcher... 2480mH with only 3 layers!
This is definitely high enough. However, you are saying that the inductance barely changes when the magnet is attached!... this should not be. This is where the problem is.
What color are your cores?
Luc
Quote from: NextGen67 on March 21, 2010, 11:15:32 AM
@Luc,
Could you give me a conclusion? I need to confirm something...
Could you remove [as in physically take it away] your pick-up coil for a while and tune your circuit is most optimal state. Once you have that, place your Pick-up coil back again, but do *not* put a load on it.
If my thinking is correct, your circuit became now in an *de-tuned* state ! - Could you confirm that for me?
Also, you will [easily] be able to bring your circuit back in resonance again, by *lowering* your frequency slightly [I'm not to sure if it is lowering, but I think is it lowering]. - Could you confirm this is also true ?
Now when you place a load on the Pick-up coil [or short circuit it] you should *not* see any negative effects on your circuit as in cap de-charge, or de-tuning effects. - Could you confirm this is also true ? [***]
If you have an extra magnet laying around (such a small round one): if you have your circuit is perfect tuned state, and you add [stack] the small magnet at the end of the others, your circuit will become *de-tuned* and you can re-tune it back again, by *increasing* the frequency a bit. - Can you confirm this is true ?
Ok, that is it :-)
I've analyzed your scope shots, and it appears to me that I understand what is going on. Your pick-up coil can be greatly improved by making full use of all available energy available on that side.. you will need a tubercular coil, so it can 'pick-up' all available energy along the Z-ax. Also this solves the number of pick-up coils to just *one* with a better effective factor. If you have a 'sniffer' to look around where you have still good M-fields, you can take that factor as outer width for your coil.
[***] It *is* possible that if you put a NON resistive load on the pickup coil, it *could* have negative effects on the rest of your circuit, but [if true] these can be fixed.
--
NextGen67
Hi NextGen67,
I have done the tests you suggest above some days back but did
NOT take notes at the time. I will redo all the tests and post the results or a video which ever is easier for me to do.
Luc
QuoteQuoteHarry: The spacer between the coil and the magnet provides the push. You can think of the spacer as a kind of spring. It gets compressed slightly by the magnet when the pulse is off due to the magnets attraction to the core. The spacer expands when the pulse is on because the core's attractiveness is reduced. See my attached concept diagram. The magnet placement and the flatter coil help to maximise the difference in attraction between the on and off states. (edited)
nextgen67: You realize that the energy to vibrate the magnet is coming from what *we* put into it - right? And since it takes *work* to do the displacement of the magnet, we lose energy with it by such. The energy you receive from the magnet 'vibrate back' to the coil, is put in by *us* in the first place to 'vibrate away' it, and since it took *work*, what comes back is *less* than what we did put in in the first place.
For the moment think of a coil spring compressed by a stone. Imagine you can switch gravity off so it expands to its uncompressed height because the stone is now weightless. At this height you switch gravity on again, and the coil spring is compressed again. If the energy to switch gravity off is less than the work done
by the stone to compress the spring, then free energy will be produced when the coil spring expands.
The magnet and spring behave the same way. If the energy to switch off the magnetism (i.e. rotate the domains in the core) is less than the work done by the magnet compressing the spring, free energy will be produced when the spring expands.
QuoteQuotebecause the core's attractiveness is reduced.
Which is because *WE* fed it with the energy to do so.
Yes, but besides stating CoE, we don't know if the energy stored in the spring
is the same as the energy required to rotate the core domains.
QuoteSo, when the 'core's attractiveness is not reduced' anymore, you think that then we will receive a gain in energy, because the magnet *would* inject energy [by moving back to the core again]... But this energy is the one that is has *cost* us to make it less attractive in the first place [minus the losses, because *work* has done]. See what you have achieved as a temporary storage... you store something, and then a little later you receive it back again [minus some energy because it has cost some of that to do the *work* to enable storage].
QuoteInstead now look at it like this:
Imagine this: You push hard against a 500Kg stone and the stone does not move [because it is to heavy]... The *work* done [you pushing], *must* go *somewhere*.... Would it in fact not be *you* who would move instead ? ... Ok, now translate this fact back to the magnet and core ;)
The concept I have described is like the orbo, except instead taping the circular motion of the rotor magnets with a pickup coil, you would tap the linear oscillation of the magnets with a pickup coil.
Some free energy might be injected to the coils, but I suspect much more can be tapped with a pick up coil.
QuoteLook at the scope shot I included earlier, and find the places where the magnet *would* 'vibrate up' , and places where it *would* 'vibrate back'.... Interesting isn't it?
Besides the bump, between the up and down '*would be* movement' of the magnet (along it's time line), where it *would be* coming down till it finally is back in start position [the horizontal duty cycle length part, off phase now!], see what is happening there in the scope shot? Even more interesting.. isn't it.... *that* is where the 0.005 mW seems to come from.
The scope shot I refer to: http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=8892.msg233528#msg233528
Yes, the trace seems to be consist with a magnet oscillating.
QuoteEdit: This might also explain *why* it is so extremely important to have the *exact* [well as exact as possible] 'tuning' for the resonance... Because if the magnet it's *would be* movement was not *exactly* in line with the coils behavior, there would be no gain [which is clearly happening as Luc shows when he de-tunes the coil].
Yes.
QuoteEdit2:
Quote
The question is does the energy required for rotation equal or exceed the energy of the induced current due to the motion of the magnets. If it does, then it is not overunity.
Well, I'm a bit reluctant to say it so bluntly, but yes, looking at the scope picture, it has -to me- undeniable AE properties -very small- but nevertheless there ! (as a side note, even more remarkably the same as Steorns one!... it is a copy actually time line wise seen).
(I use the term AE[Additional Energy] instead of OU, meaning OU=energy from nowhere, thus created, while AE comes from *somewhere* other than what we fed into the device)
--
NextGen67
I think the bumps represent back emf so this need to be mimized. This is what Steorn did by arranging their magnets as they did.
Quote from: gyulasun on March 21, 2010, 04:33:27 PM
Hi Luc,
Mark also found an even better type:
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=8892.msg233538#msg233538
And it is at newark.com:
http://www.newark.com/jsp/search/results.jsp?N=0&Ntk=gensearch_001&Ntt=STS2DNF30&Ntx=mode+matchallpartial&suggestions=false&ref=globalsearch&_requestid=114222&isGoback=false&isRedirect=false
MAybe it would be worth trying too.
Thanks for the new video, I am surprised you found using a second pick up coil already reflects back to the tank circuit?
rgds, Gyula
Hi Gyula,
yes, amazing specs!... I read that post after I posted. I'll look into it and see if I can buy a few.
It was a surprise to me to see the current increase and decease connecting and disconnecting the load to the second pickup coil. It did not do this previously when the loop was not closed.
Do you think if the pickup coils were tuned it would have less of a coupling effect with the primary coil?
Seeing this test 10 video do you think it is worth continuing?
Thanks
Luc
Quote from: gotoluc on March 21, 2010, 03:56:01 PM
Hi everyone,
I had a little free time while my son is visiting his mother and made a new video.
However, it's not showing any over unity :(
Sorry :-[ this may not be what we were hoping for :-\
Let me know if I'm missing something.
Luc
Link to video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c7CsBr7ouPE
Try sliding the stack of magnets inside the pickup coil.
Harry
Quote from: HarryV on March 21, 2010, 05:35:43 PM
Try sliding the stack of magnets inside the pickup coil.
Harry
Sorry Harry, that will makes things worse.
Luc
gotoluc:
After looking at Self running Test Video #10...Don't give up too quickly.
#1 - I notice you have not produced resonance in the pickup coil
by adding a capacitor right across the coil before the diodes. Maybe
you can measure the inductance of that coil. And then use a Web
resonance calculator to find the best cap and then tune it by adjusting
the capacitor slightly to see if you can use resonance to boost the
3.81Vdc Drive signal up by any. It would be interesting to see
if resonant coil tuning effects the main circuit tuning. This drive
level is now low for the IRF640 but as I have said I think more
in line with what a IRF510 requires.
#2 - Another thing worth trying is to try to use a voltage doubler, voltage
multiplier after the coil to get the power voltage on the NE555 up. This
will probably not do much now cause it will just load the coil more and
the gate drive energy is being wasted. But in the future it may make
the circuit more reasonably like signal generator drive.
#3 - Once you have a better transistor we may be in overunity
territory slightly...The transistor will behave better. plus energy to
the gate is currently being wasted driving the transistor will be
retained.
#4 - I am hoping you have full frequency agility with the NE555
to go where the overunity wants.
Overall I'm am somewhat positively impressed by what I'm am seeing.
You have generated some kind of a gate drive signal with just this
one pickup coil and that gate drive is in-line with what I expected
to be needed for the new transistor. The CMOS NE555, it seems,
is doing it's thing.
Any additional pickup coil may want to direct it's energy back to
main battery.
:S:MarkSCoffman
Quote from: gotoluc on March 21, 2010, 05:40:12 PM
Sorry Harry, that will makes things worse.
Luc
I am thinking about how to tap the vibration of the magnets with a coil.
Quote from: gotoluc on March 21, 2010, 05:34:22 PM
.....
Do you think if the pickup coils were tuned it would have less of a coupling effect with the primary coil?
Seeing this test 10 video do you think it is worth continuing?
....
Hi Luc,
First Q: No it would not have less coupling effect with the primary, unfortunately.
Second Q: Yes, another MOSFET type that has about 1/10 of the capacitance values than the IRF640 has would be worth trying. Much useful input energy is comsumed in the rather high gate-source capacitance now.
rgds, Gyula
Quote from: mscoffman on March 21, 2010, 05:42:12 PM
...
#1 - I notice you have not produced resonance in the pickup coil
by adding a capacitor right across the coil before the diodes.
...
@mscoffman
Could you consider connecting the needed capacitor in series with the coil, not in parallel?
I ask this because a parallel resonant LC circuit has a high impedance at resonance and the most output can come out if you terminate it with a load that has the same value high impedance (condition for matching).
And even the CMOS 555 itself, together with driving the MOSFET, would not present a high impedance load that would be measurable to the LC resonant impedance.
By using a series resonant LC circuit, it has a low impedance 'output' (which is practically the pickup coil's copper resistance), this should be a more favorable generator output impedance for a load like even the CMOS 555.
The diode bridge of course can come after the capacitor too, one AC input goes to the series cap, the other AC input goes to the free coil end.
Can you agree with the series LC instead of the parallel one?
By the way if I saw correctly, Luc used a half wave rectifier, a single diode only for the pick up coil, but a diode bridge should be used, especially in the tuned case.
Quote
#4 - I am hoping you have full frequency agility with the NE555
to go where the overunity wants.
The CMOS TLC555 has a 2.1MHz typical frequency in astable mode, this is far better than the bipolar 555.
rgds, Gyula
@gyulason and gotoluc;
I have an even better idea. If gotoluc happens to have a small audio
output transformers available. audio 10Hz->22Khz Should handle
the 35KHz sine wave ok.
Use the signal generator sine wave output at 35Kh to evaluate
the audio transformer to have some step-down ratio. then put
a 3K resistor across the secondary and drive primary from the
pickup coil. You'll want to maximize the voltage across the 3K
resistor. Using various different transformers, center taps and
so on. I'll bet you can get it significantly higher than the 4.2Vpp
it probably is now. We want to examine 6to1 stepdown ->
2to1 stepdown ratio range.
Then substitute the bridge rectifier leads for the 3K resistor.
We probably have an impedance mismatch between that
coil and the NE555 + gate. NE555 + gate ~= 3Kohms. That
is wasting energy. This is based on the 60Vpp? on the
pickup coil unloaded. The coil should be operating closer to
this value but we are just pulling it down.
I we get it to 11Vdc or higher we should use the variable
potentiometer in series with the gate idea to trim it.
:S:MarkSCoffman
Are we talking about using an audio transformer to isolate the sig in to the fet gate?
I see the transformer as a pump of sorts and power on the input actually transfers power to the other side. Its a power in power out kinda thing. ;]
The optical is the best way. Imagine, we have optical sending internet, so freq is not an issue, and quality of signal conversion should be good also.
I have to say that all that is needed is a mosfet driver that is triggered by the optical device. And if it is 50% duty and a square wave, it should work perfectly.
I also imagine the use of a zener to keep the voltage on the charge cap leveled out at some point.
Mags
Finally, with a similar setup, the observed effect seems to be reproduced.
Input signal (Fonction generator model : GFG-8019G) @ 39.6 kHz - 8 vpp (square)
the circuit works on a 9v battery.
Adjustments and measurements made with an old 20Mhz Dual Trace Oscilloscope (ET & T 3132)
9.10v in the cap -> goto a maximum 12.10v (when disconnected) in a few seconds and stays there.
(a video is possible if necessary)
...under testing...
LightRider
@gotoluc
Saw your last video (10) with thanks. You sounded kind of pessimistic but don't let that get you down cause you just looped your first one so CONGRATULATIONS are in order. That one step is major.
I am not convinced you have the right or best frequency to look at this.
First of all, don't get all bogged down about the mosfet leakage. It is less then peanuts and not worth looking at. If guys want to know, just put a bulb or led on the mosfet drain and source and pulse the gate. If that gate has any meaningful voltage with enough north/south potential being leaked, that led will light up, but it will not. lol
If you have time, please just try this.
1) Put your 9 volt battery back on the 555 circuit.
2) Put a small bulb on the pick up coil. Remove the pickup coil from the stand it is on so you can move it around the toroid.
3) Pulse the toroid and move the pick up coil and find both the best frequency and position where the pick up coil lights the light brightest.
4) If you have the patience, try removing the magnets to see any difference. Then when you find the brightest spot, bring down the applied voltage to the toroid to see how much you really needed to keep that pickup coil bulb lit. Then play with the duty cycle to find the same. Sometimes lowering the voltage by 40% will reduce the brightness by 5% so this becomes a good deal to not only look for the brightest but most frugal settings.
Advise the result.
Now if you add another pickup coil, you may have to find the new frequency or frequencies that will light both bulbs brightest, etc. In my videos, I had found frequencies when using solo coils, but had to find new frequencies when several coils where on the toroid. You can load that toroid to the hilt.
Oh, I tried my bucking coil with your series jump connection and it does give some nice effects. I will learn more first then give some results. I had prepared a much longer post but will keep this one short instead.
wattsup
Quote from: gotoluc on March 21, 2010, 05:34:22 PM
Hi Gyula,
yes, amazing specs!... I read that post after I posted. I'll look into it and see if I can buy a few.
It was a surprise to me to see the current increase and decease connecting and disconnecting the load to the second pickup coil. It did not do this previously when the loop was not closed.
Do you think if the pickup coils were tuned it would have less of a coupling effect with the primary coil?
Seeing this test 10 video do you think it is worth continuing?
Thanks
Luc
@Luc,
YES! it is definitely worth continuing.
A few things happen in your video #10 that makes it rather logical why you have amps draw now [tough if you do your comparison test, you will find a *very* tiny difference].
What happened:
1) although you are at a 90 degree angle with the resonance coil, your pick-up coil *actually* drains energy from that toroid coil, because it is way to close to the toroid coil... Since it has 5 layers [instead of just 1], you are 'stealing' energy from it ;)
2) the mosfet is triggered with not enough energy to *properly* operate... Yes, the coil is in resonance, but you earlier found gain effect is very very limited now. See the data sheet of your FET and notice *how* high Ciss (and the other 2) are BELOW the 2.5 volt [that is why 5v and up would be better] .... So even with *optimal* tuning, the resonance will not be as good as you had before.
3) 5 volt and upwards is better to see for PtP [this is even true for the fet you might want to buy next].
So all with all, test #10 gives wrongly data.
What you *could* do, and will *definitely* show the differences with your earlier scope shots you put on the board here is:
1) Just feed the 555 with external power for a while (battery), and remove your pick-up coil. [Make sure you have at least a PtP as what you had before what was 7.81 V if I recollect well].
2) Tune your circuit into best possible way again.
3) Save 2 scope shots of it (like the same as which you posted here before).
3) Now lower the PtP to the 3.81 volt [as what you had in your video#10].
4) Tune your circuit into best possible way again.
5) Save 2 scope shots of it (like the same as which you posted here before).
6) Post the 4 scope shots again.
What you might see your when you do these tests, would probably be that your 7.81 and 3.81 images give [firstly] quite similar pictures, but if you look closely, especially that *bump* you mentioned earlier before and the horizontal line of the OFF phase, you probably see difference there.
Secondly, when you would do the 'energy going up in Cap' again (where it wend up from 16.64 volt to 16.80 volt [as shown in video#7], you would [and *should*] have the same or better result [with the 7.81 PtP]... Try that again.. you should get a raise from 16.64 to 16.80 volt over *exactly* 20 seconds (well might be 20.5 seconds).
When you repeat the same 'energy going up in Cap' again but now with the 3.81 PtP you will *most likely* notice that [in comparable way !], the energy going in the cap has a much lesser charge rate.... Actually I wonder if you with a PtP of 3.81 volt still can get a decent 'charge back' at all.
Don't for a second think of giving up yet :-)When you put up the 4 scope shots again [as i mentioned above], at least we all can see what is the differences between them, and the difference with the one you posted here already.
EDIT: What I try to establish here is to show that [by using the 555 now], we are *still* able to get the same scope shots as you posted before here. Because if those scope shots [especially the 7.81 PtP one] shows *less* performance, that should be adressed firstly.
--
NextGen67
Quote from: Magluvin link=topic=8892.msg233725#msg233725 A=1269221071
Are we talking about using an audio transformer to isolate the sig in to the fet gate?
I see the transformer as a pump of sorts and power on the input actually transfers power to the other side. Its a power in power out kinda thing. ;]
The optical is the best way. Imagine, we have optical sending internet, so freq is not an issue, and quality of signal conversion should be good also.
I have to say that all that is needed is a mosfet driver that is triggered by the optical device. And if it is 50% duty and a square wave, it should work perfectly.
I also imagine the use of a zener to keep the voltage on the charge cap leveled out at some point.
Mags
Hi Mags,
Sorry but MarkSCoffman did not mean using the audio transformer to isolate the sig to the FET gate. He proposed a possible impedance matching with the step down audio transformer to utilize the output power from the pick up coil in the best way for feeding the CMOS 555 with supply voltage.
Basically I agree with his proposal, it is a kind of impedance matching anyway. The pickup A is made parallel resonant with a capacitor at the output frequency and the audio transformer steps the (hopefully) 30-40V peak to peak resonant voltage down to a 8-10V at its secondary output that would be full wave rectified for feeding the 555 pulse gen that drives the MOSFET gate.
Of course if the pick up coil would have some taps in its winding, say at 1/4 and at 1/2 of its full number of turns, then the transformation could be done by the pickup coil itself, at the tuned resonance freq.
rgds, Gyula
Quote from: NextGen67 on March 19, 2010, 10:54:11 AM
Gyula,
Would it not be possible to simply attach only the signal generator to the mosfet and then connect the Cap to the source and drain, and just observe what goes into the cap ?
Actually a [known] voltage/amperage could be supplied to get it at the correct working point, but this can with a calculation be subtracted from the cap value later again?
EDIT: No need to attach battery I guess, since the signal generator can easily deliver enough voltage ? Anyhow, after say 5 minutes of charge, one could see how much the cap collected.
--
NextGen67
Hi NextGen67,
I have done the test you asked for in the above post to determine how much is leaking through the gate. More tests are also coming ;)
Supply Battery connected to capacitor bank to first tune the circuit is 12.88vdc
Setup is using signal generator and feeding 3 IRF640 connected in parallel
Tuned for maximum returned current -.000224 @ 38KHz (with no pickup coil)
Once signal generator is set there is no changes to it as you can see in video.
Link to video demo: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MX2nZSOhxfc
1st Shot is Scope probe across Generator input, the other probe across a 100 Ohm resistor in series with Generator ground and coil tuned to send back most energy.
2nd Shot is Scope probe across Generator input, the other probe across a 100 Ohm resistor in series with Generator ground with source & drain to cap
through coil3rd Shot is Scope probe across Generator input, the other probe across a 100 Ohm resistor in series with Generator ground with source & drain to cap
no coil
I think i can give an explanation for the raising voltage in the cap.
The tuning with the magnet has to bring the core material *close to* saturation. That's the reason why the magnet must not be too strong, or too close to the core. If the magnet already saturates or over-saturates the core it doesn't work. The magnet drives the core into a non-linear state so that it acts like a rectifier.
Here are more details: http://www.linux-host.org/energy/srect.htm (http://www.linux-host.org/energy/srect.htm)
The pulses going into the gate of the MOSFET are leaving the MOSFET on the other side as AC voltage, because of the gate capacitance. This AC voltage may be rectified by the 'magnetic rectifier' and will increase the cap voltage, if all the other losses are low enough.
Of course, this is no 'free energy'.
It's a well-known effect which was discovered more than 120 years ago... :-\
(maybe it would be a good idea to read some old books... some things have already been forgotten)
Quote from: skywatcher on March 22, 2010, 03:24:41 PM
I think i can give an explanation for the raising voltage in the cap.
The tuning with the magnet has to bring the core material *close to* saturation. That's the reason why the magnet must not be too strong, or too close to the core. If the magnet already saturates or over-saturates the core it doesn't work. The magnet drives the core into a non-linear state so that it acts like a rectifier.
Here are more details: http://www.linux-host.org/energy/srect.htm (http://www.linux-host.org/energy/srect.htm)
The pulses going into the gate of the MOSFET are leaving the MOSFET on the other side as AC voltage, because of the gate capacitance. This AC voltage may be rectified by the 'magnetic rectifier' and will increase the cap voltage, if all the other losses are low enough.
Of course, this is no 'free energy'.
It's a well-known effect which was discovered more than 120 years ago... :-\
(maybe it would be a good idea to read some old books... some things have already been forgotten)
Hi skywatcher,
I replied to your post about the toroid you wound here: http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=8892.msg233678#msg233678 and asked what color the cores were that you used.
Can you let me know please.
Luc
Quote from: gotoluc on March 22, 2010, 04:24:42 PM
I replied to your post about the toroid you wound here: http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=8892.msg233678#msg233678 and asked what color the cores were that you used.
They have a gray coating.
Yesterday i made a core from a high-permeability material which is similar to Nanoperm or Metglass. With this core there was a considerable drop in inductance when i attached the magnet. With the N48 magnet it decreased by more than 99%. So i used a much smaller magnet. But also with this coil, i didn't get any remarkable effects. Not even a real resonance. The combined inductance without the magnet was about 400 mH (3 layers of wire).
I think i will not put any further effort into this topic.
Quote from: gyulasun on March 22, 2010, 07:12:35 AM
Hi Mags,
Sorry but MarkSCoffman did not mean using the audio transformer to isolate the sig to the FET gate. He proposed a possible impedance matching with the step down audio transformer to utilize the output power from the pick up coil in the best way for feeding the CMOS 555 with supply voltage.
rgds, Gyula
Exactly Gyula; as the voltage goes down in a 5:1 ratio the current will go up in the
inverse 1:5. The transformer is a power conserving impedance matching function.
A used 56K telephone modem card would have a suitable audio transformer.
Hi fidelity required for 56K. Hoping the transformer is 1:1 and the secondary
winding would have a center tap. There is even a way to use a 1:1 transformer
with no CT center tap to give 2:1 by making both windings into the primary.
The other thing to check is the CMOS NE555 timer chip...One may be able
to build a separate circuit for it where you set all the resistors to 10 times
their previous resistance and divide the capacitor by ten. It may not serve
as well as the commercial circuit board, but it might consume less net power.
You wouldn't want to effect final drive power through it though.
---
Quote from: LightRider on March 21, 2010, 10:29:07 PM
Finally, with a similar setup, the observed effect seems to be reproduced.
Input signal (Function generator model : GFG-8019G) @ 39.6 kHz - 8 vpp (square)
the circuit works on a 9v battery.
Adjustments and measurements made with an old 20Mhz Dual Trace Oscilloscope (ET & T 3132)
9.10v in the cap -> goto a maximum 12.10v (when disconnected) in a few seconds and stays there.
(a video is possible if necessary)
...under testing...
LightRider
@LightRider
Excellent, if true. Please, don't repeat errors of the past, use the optoisolator method
to delete added function generator energy early. The asymmetric 4n35 opto signal may
work..It might even make things better. :D. If not, operate the signal generator at
2 x f and run the opto output through a cmos /2 FF flip-flop with circuit energy supply
coming from the bulk capacitor. Please keep us informed with what happens.
Also, what value bulk capacitor are you using?...that will affect energy to voltage
conversion speed.
---
Quote from: skywatcher on March 22, 2010, 03:24:41 PM
Of course, this is no 'free energy'.
It's a well-known effect which was discovered more than 120 years ago... :-\
(maybe it would be a good idea to read some old books... some things have already been forgotten)
Don't be too negative skywatcher. Maybe we are intergrating towards unity
gain but maybe we are integrating towards overunity. We have a line of what
looks like overunity and I don't think we should to dismiss it without checking.
Even if we eventually dismiss/accept where the overunity comes from it could
still make an intriguing glass bookend. :) It'd drive people nuts!
:S:MarkSCoffman
@skywatcher
Wrap a thin copper wire around a small section of the toroid. This will act as a flux blocker. Charging this tiny wrap by pulsing, will increase reluctance to saturation just in the tiny area beneath the wrap, blocking the flux path from the magnet to the rest of the toroid. Also, it would help to add a spacer between the magnet and the toroid material. Your dealing with a material of very high permeability, with a million times less reluctance then thin air. Your first attempts have met with instant and overwhelming saturation. Try to get some control over this effect before you give up. Your magnets are way to strong and too close. Try wrapping a flux blocker coil in between the magnet and the toroid, decrease magnet strength and increase airgap. Try pulsing the blocker wrap at different frequencies pulse widths and power settings.
Quote from: NextGen67 on March 21, 2010, 11:15:32 AM
@Luc,
Could you give me a conclusion? I need to confirm something...
Could you remove [as in physically take it away] your pick-up coil for a while and tune your circuit is most optimal state. Once you have that, place your Pick-up coil back again, but do *not* put a load on it.
If my thinking is correct, your circuit became now in an *de-tuned* state ! - Could you confirm that for me?
Also, you will [easily] be able to bring your circuit back in resonance again, by *lowering* your frequency slightly [I'm not to sure if it is lowering, but I think is it lowering]. - Could you confirm this is also true ?
Now when you place a load on the Pick-up coil [or short circuit it] you should *not* see any negative effects on your circuit as in cap de-charge, or de-tuning effects. - Could you confirm this is also true ? [***]
If you have an extra magnet laying around (such a small round one): if you have your circuit is perfect tuned state, and you add [stack] the small magnet at the end of the others, your circuit will become *de-tuned* and you can re-tune it back again, by *increasing* the frequency a bit. - Can you confirm this is true ?
Ok, that is it :-)
NextGen67
Hi NextGen67,
here is the next video to test your above questions. Only your last question was not done in the video. I have tried adding a magnet on the opposite end of the toroid before and it has no benefit. Maybe we can look at this later if you want. Anyways, I think we should look at what I have for now to see if it's real before we try other things.
Supply Battery connected to capacitor bank is 12.88vdc
Setup is using signal generator and feeding 3 IRF640 connected in parallel
Tuned for maximum returned current -.000224 @ 38KHz (with no pickup coil)
Signal generator is at the same settings as test 11 video.
Link to video demo: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fIFJ5o1eqsE
1st Shot is probe across Generator input, other probe across pickup coil (open coil)
2nd Shot is probe across Generator input, other probe across pickup coil, connected to single diode, capacitor and 1K Ohm load
3rd Shot is probe across Generator input, other probe across pickup coil, connected to single diode, capacitor and 1K Ohm load (time base change)
4th Shot is probe across Generator input, other probe across pickup coil, connected to single diode and open capacitor (no load and re-tuned)
5th Shot is probe across Generator input, other probe across pickup coil, connected to single diode but open capacitor (no load and no re-tuning)
deleted
Quote from: skywatcher on March 22, 2010, 04:34:28 PM
They have a gray coating.
Yesterday i made a core from a high-permeability material which is similar to Nanoperm or Metglass. With this core there was a considerable drop in inductance when i attached the magnet. With the N48 magnet it decreased by more than 99%. So i used a much smaller magnet. But also with this coil, i didn't get any remarkable effects. Not even a real resonance. The combined inductance without the magnet was about 400 mH (3 layers of wire).
I think i will not put any further effort into this topic.
Thanks for the reply skywatcher,
I just measured my coils inductance (setup in video 11 and 12) and it is about 11.75mH
One last test I would suggest is you attach you inductance meter and slowly bring your magnet so you get as close as you can to that inductance value. Make spacers so it stays at that inductance and then pulse with 12.88vdc in the 38KHz range @ 50% duty cycle. You should find a frequency around that range that the current will drop by lots.
Question: are you using a signal generator or a 555?
I get the best results using my signal generator then the 555 timer. I will try to figure out why.
Thanks for sharing
Luc
Quote from: mscoffman on March 22, 2010, 04:48:56 PM
@LightRider
Excellent, if true. Please, don't repeat errors of the past, use the optoisolator method
to delete added function generator energy early. The asymmetric 4n35 opto signal may
work..It might even make things better. :D. If not, operate the signal generator at
2 x f and run the opto output through a cmos /2 FF flip-flop with circuit energy supply
coming from the bulk capacitor. Please keep us informed with what happens.
Also, what value bulk capacitor are you using?...that will affect energy to voltage
conversion speed.
:S:MarkSCoffman
500 VDC - 240 MFD.
39.6 kHz - 8 vpp (square)
9v battery.
9.10v -> to a maximum 12.10v (when disconnected)
4N35 opto is currently tested... (result tomorrow)
Thanks,
LightRider
Preliminary results with the 4N35 opto :
Frequencies were swept (taking into account the 4N35 tolerance)
Different duty cycle has been tried
but...
In the best case, the cap drains very slowly.
but does not continue to fill as in previous results (first circuit without the 4N35).
Perhaps the setup or adjustments are not optimal...
but it seems difficult to arrive at the same result with the 4N35.
setup:
the 4N35 was added to trigger IRF640 Gate.
the rest of the circuit remains unchanged...
circuit with a 9v battery.
500 VDC - 240 MFD cap.
IRF640 mosfet
same toroidal coil
Thanks,
LightRider
Sorry Ms I must have missed something. =]
I assumed in reply without all facts.
Was thinking. Self Running coil may be a key set of words to think about.
Lets say the coil is in resonance and the mosfet is just tapping or kicking along. On the scope shots, are we seeing a ring within those spikes? Or is it that the pulse sent in, comes back in a larger form and then done.
If that return pulse is more than what went in, then if we have another coil tuned in the same manor, then we redirect with a diode the reverse pulse to the second tuned coil, of which you should get a return pulse that can be sent , via diode to the next tuned coil, and so on. Each step increasing output to the next. Now being that it is working at low freq, there must be delays along the chain, so a no. of tuned coils would have to be determined to be back in phase at the end if we wanted it to be a true self running coil. But using a timer or sig to drive the first coil in the chain and collecting the higher output is good too.
Maybe only 2 tuned coils can feed each other till melt down. lol But a load or fused circuit can prevent that.
I think when you get to using more than 1 identically tuned coils in the right config, things are really going to happen.
mags
Quote from: LightRider on March 22, 2010, 11:16:28 PM
Preliminary results with the 4N35 opto :
Frequencies were swept (taking into account the 4N35 tolerance)
Different duty cycle has been tried
but...
In the best case, the cap drains very slowly.
but does not continue to fill as in previous results (first circuit without the 4N35).
Perhaps the setup or adjustments are not optimal...
but it seems difficult to arrive at the same result with the 4N35.
setup:
the 4N35 was added to trigger IRF640 Gate.
the rest of the circuit remains unchanged...
circuit with a 9v battery.
500 VDC - 240 MFD cap.
IRF640 mosfet
same toroidal coil
Thanks,
LightRider
Hi LightRider,
thanks for doing the tests and posting your result.
Do you have a scope?... if so, can you take a picture or post a scope shot of the gate pulse (without OPTO) that gave you the positive result and the pulse of the OPTO'ed one.
I would like to see what each form looks like.
Thanks for sharing
Luc
Quote from: LightRider on March 22, 2010, 11:16:28 PM
Preliminary results with the 4N35 opto :
Frequencies were swept (taking into account the 4N35 tolerance)
Different duty cycle has been tried
but...
In the best case, the cap drains very slowly.
but does not continue to fill as in previous results (first circuit without the 4N35).
Perhaps the setup or adjustments are not optimal...
but it seems difficult to arrive at the same result with the 4N35.
setup:
the 4N35 was added to trigger IRF640 Gate.
the rest of the circuit remains unchanged...
circuit with a 9v battery.
500 VDC - 240 MFD cap.
IRF640 mosfet
same toroidal coil
Thanks,
LightRider
Really, Good work LightRider...More or less what one would expect. It
would be nice if your could get your bulk capacitor up in value with
30WVdc. A used high res computer CRT might contain some "low ESR"
ones. At least to a couple of Kuf's seems to work well for gotoluc.
Don't forget the variable resistor to tune the drive level on the
IRF640's gate! See what that does.
---
If you could now wind a coil on a plastic wire spool somewhat like J.
Naudin had, that could slip over the magnets to near the toroid and
connect that into a Schottky bridge rectifier and some electrolytic
cap...driving the opto's output transistor...you just may have it! If
you could wind some wire then test the voltage then wind some more
to adjust coil's output voltage under load that might help. and/Or consider
a power conserving impedance matcher. Just kind of throw it into the
circuit temporarily at various points. To see if anything could benefit
impedance matching adjustments.
Don't burn yourself out though, we maybe chasing unity gain.
We just need *a little of claimed overunity* from the pickup coil!
:S:MarkSCoffman
@all
I can explain any of those scope shots in Coil test #11, #12
video except the weird waveform in scope shot #1.
just ask if interested.
---
@gotoluc
An interesting experiment would be to get some of Bedini's R60
welding rods to make a square metal core for pickup coil. Set one
end of the core parallel to the base of the plastic spool. Then stick
the magnet stack to that base and place the other end of the core
to near the toroid. The core mag circuit will conduct the magnetic
field up to the toroid. Nothing should happen because of the
strength of the magnets, but it still might.?.That is - no cutting
of lines or reduction of field strength = no signal from the pickup
coil.
:S:MarkSCoffman
See attachment. This is Kunal's flux toroid generator. Basicly, just a magnet inside the toroid with pulsed reluctance switches on either side.
Quote from: mscoffman on March 23, 2010, 03:12:18 PM
@all
I can explain any of those scope shots in Coil test #11, #12
video except the weird waveform in scope shot #1.
just ask if interested.
<...>
:S:MarkSCoffman
MarkSCoffman,
Yes, please do so, as many of us will be interested about that -)
As for the Pick-up coil... Since Luc is back at square one for a while, In my opinion it is better to see what happens when he plugs in the STS2DNF30L (or a replacement one). We need to forget about the pick-up coil for a while, and figure out first if an mosfet with lower values (better specs) then the IRF640 will indeed also increase the 'charging up' effect of the Capacitor.
Reason being the IRF640 needs quite some energy to actually switch it ON, so *if* some of this energy triples through the circuit, it will be amplified and in such a way *could* be responsible for the cap 'charge up'... However a replacement mosfet (STS2DNF30L) for example which requires *way* less energy to switch on, hence would *also* cause *less* energy triple trough the circuit... Now *when* the STS2DNF30L results in a *better* cap 'charge up' then the IRF640 it can be argued leakage is not the cause.
On the other hand, if the STS2DNF30L shows a cap 'charge up' that is far lower then when he used the IRF640, it can be argued that indeed the hidden leakage could be responsible for the cap 'charge up'.
Sounds plausible ?
--
NextGen67
Quote from: gotoluc on March 23, 2010, 12:28:33 AM
Hi LightRider,
thanks for doing the tests and posting your result.
Do you have a scope?... if so, can you take a picture or post a scope shot of the gate pulse (without OPTO) that gave you the positive result and the pulse of the OPTO'ed one.
I would like to see what each form looks like.
Thanks for sharing
Luc
Here is a short video that appears to demonstrate what gotoluc himself experienced.
For this video the 4N35 OPTO was disconnected and
the signal generator was directly feeding the gate (square wave)
the oscilloscope shows the gate pulse (square wave - 5v p tp p)
and the measurement of the IRF640 drain (this helps for the optimum adjustment)
note that my knowledge and experience in the field of electronics is limited,
these experiments are done for fun only.
If you find errors, which is likely, please let me know.
Thanks,
LightRider
Video at:
http://www.youtube.com/user/LRCan1?feature=mhw4
sorry for quality ... and no sound ...! :-\
Thanks LightRider for taking the time to make a video demo of your setup.
Do you have a conclusion as to what is going on in your experiment?
Thanks for sharing
Luc
Quote from: mscoffman on March 23, 2010, 03:12:18 PM
@all
I can explain any of those scope shots in Coil test #11, #12
video except the weird waveform in scope shot #1.
just ask if interested.
Yes Mark :) please don't hold back.
Quote from: mscoffman on March 23, 2010, 03:12:18 PM
@gotoluc
An interesting experiment would be to get some of Bedini's R60
welding rods to make a square metal core for pickup coil. Set one
end of the core parallel to the base of the plastic spool. Then stick
the magnet stack to that base and place the other end of the core
to near the toroid. The core mag circuit will conduct the magnetic
field up to the toroid. Nothing should happen because of the
strength of the magnets, but it still might.?.That is - no cutting
of lines or reduction of field strength = no signal from the pickup
coil.
:S:MarkSCoffman
I'm not sure I follow or understand this Mark. However before making changes or adding, I would like to confirm if the energy is coming form the Generator.
Would you agree with NextGen67 that if I use a mosfet with lower input capacitance and it still performs like the IRF640 that this would be an indication that the extra energy was not coming from the Generator?
Thanks for sharing
Luc
Quote from: gotoluc on March 23, 2010, 09:31:18 PM
Thanks LightRider for taking the time to make a video demo of your setup.
Do you have a conclusion as to what is going on in your experiment?
Thanks for sharing
Luc
A conclusion... not at this point.
Experience seems to show that with the 4N35 no effects outside the ordinary is seen.
Assuming the leak in the IRF640 is more than likely.
Someone with more experience will probably have to test this hypothesis.
Observation...
For the effect to takes place, the gate must be drive a minimum voltage.
The frequency and duty cycle seems to greatly influence this variable.
The frequency seems to be close to 35-40 khz ... (regardless of certain variables).
That's it for now... more to come.
The experience of Mr. JLN also seems intriguing road.
Thanks,
LightRider
Thanks for the reply LightRider :)
With the IRF640 I can have the gate voltage at 10vpp and still get the effect but as you say the bests results are when lower voltages are used. For me the best results are in the 7vpp range.
@everyone
Here is an interesting scope shot using a 2SK2806-01 mosfet I had salvaged some time ago from power supply I think.
I'm using 12.88vdc as input and the green probe is across my generator input and the yellow is across a 100 Ohm carbon resistor which is in series on the ground side of the generator input.
Interesting to see the sine wave across the resistor. I wonder if it's the generators internal components resonating? At this setting it's sending back -.000043 at 12.88vdc. Also, take note of how low of voltage I can drive this mosfet!... don't think it's not driving the gate as I checked and it is. Since the pickup coil has 0.22vdc on the 1K Ohm load.
This is the lowest RMS voltage (156mv) across the 100 Ohm resistor I got so far with it sending back energy.
What do you make of this?
Luc
ADDED
I added another scope shot where I added capacitance to the toroid coil to lower resonating frequency so now the pickup coil now has .35vdc on the 1K Ohm load (twice the power) without raising the 150mv RMS across the 100 Ohm current shunt and still sending back -.000006
Quote from: gotoluc on March 24, 2010, 01:02:01 AM
<...>
ADDED
I added another scope shot where I added capacitance to the toroid coil to lower resonating frequency so now the pickup coil now has .35vdc on the 1K Ohm load (twice the power) without raising the 150mv RMS across the 100 Ohm current shunt and still sending back -.000006
What do you get if you take out the pickup coil in the above test (still -.000006 or less or more), and how does the scope shot looks like then?
--
NextGen67
Quote
....
Also, take note of how low of voltage I can A this mosfet!... don't think it's not driving the gate as I checked and it is. Since the pickup coil has 0.22vdc on the 1K Ohm load.
This is the lowest RMS voltage (156mv) across the 100 Ohm resistor I got so far with it sending back energy.
What do you make of this?
Hi Luc,
In your 2SK2806 MOSFET the socalled V
th gate-source threshold voltage is about 1/3 of that of the IRF640 i.e. between 1 and 2V only. This means an advantage in input power wrt the IRF640 (the need of lower gate-source voltage means lower input power).
Here is the data sheet: http://skory.gylcomp.hu/alkatresz/2sk2806.pdf
Quote
ADDED
I added another scope shot where I added capacitance to the toroid coil to lower resonating frequency so now the pickup coil now has .35vdc on the 1K Ohm load (twice the power) without raising the 150mv RMS across the 100 Ohm current shunt and still sending back -.000006
Did you add the capacitance in parallel with the toroidal coil?
Did you have any capacitance in the pickup coil circuit to make it resonant at the toroidal coil's lower resonant frequency? The two freqs have to be the same to get the most output. Hint: at the best setup as you wrote above (150mV across 100Ohm etc), try to place capacitors in series with the 1KOhm load to reach a resonant pickup coil situation (or as Mark suggested, connect it in parallel and use an audio transformer to step down the output power from the pickup coil), to approximate best a matched condition between the pickup circuit as a whole and the 1k load.
Thanks, Gyula
double post
Ok since I was asked: On the test #11 and 12# Scope pictures
Waveform Picture #1 â€" The weird one I don’t it looks like dual frequency,
the driving one and the resonant one are fighting or combining with each
other. Not very important.
Waveform Picture #2 â€" clipping of the top of the pickup coil voltage signal
due to the rectifier diode turning on. If you connected the bridge rectifier
as a bridge rather than using one diode from the bridge then both the top
and the bottom of the signal would be clipped. The way to look at it is the
coil signal is pushing up on the cap voltage and the cap under load is
pushing back on the signal squashing it back down. This shows that the
load resistor and the coil impedance is (badly) mismatched. If the bridge
was connected then only 1.4Vdc of the coil signal (squarewave) would
be showing that is .7 volts pedestal +| -.7| pedestal whipped around
by silicon diodes in the bridge. With the bridge, both sides of the signals
polarity try to push the cap voltage up rather then just one. The bridge
would be more efficient than a single diode…So connecting the full bridge
would improve efficiency of rectifying the pickup energy. Signal total =
0.42Vdc pp peak-to-peak.
Waveform #4 â€" unloaded, there is no load resistor pulling the cap voltage
down. So the cap charges up to 11.2Vdc revealing the full pickup coil
waveform. Only a very small part of the signal pushes up on the cap
voltage. *No work is being done* by the pickup coil â€" so there is no
impedance mismatch….But now one sees a *voltage phase shift*
occurring between the driving (clock)signal and the pickup voltage.
What do we know about AC signals; When no work is being done the
voltage waveform and the current waveform are 180 degrees out
of phase. It be hard to see the current waveform when thing are
disconnected but we could see it with a one megohm load or something.
When an impedance mismatch favors more load the voltage and current
waveform will be 0 degrees out from each other or in phase and closely
aligned to the coil drive phase because work is being done. Note that
the signal phase *leads* the drive phase. I hope that means inductive
reactance but it may mean capacitive reactance. This tells “How†our
two coils are coupled to one another.
Waveform #x-
A little bit further on in the thread. We have waveforms from the
2SK2806-01 mosfet. Notice that the waveforms there are less flat
ie. less digital…Most likely this is due to the higher final drive
impedance of that mosfet so this means the IRF604 is a preferable
transistor. Generally that ST transistor is very newly designed so
will take advantage of the latest in mosfet design tech.
I want to correct the above as pointed out in gyulason. The gate
voltage is much better on this transistor...which may explain the
difference in output waveforms. So the 2SK2806-01 has preferable
gate characteristic...the Rd's is better but Cissy is still too high.
---
It's important to note. When you couple an generator to a load
*The maximum power is transferred between them when the
impedance (resistance) of the source and load are equal to
each other.* Note that power = continuous or instantaneous
energy.
So this is why I tend to emphasise impedance matching in overunity
projects. Mechanical impedance is exactly the same way. If we simply
use ballast resistors the energy in the resistor is converted to heat
and lost. As long as we are not converting it to heat it is either staying
in the circuit or coming back to the circuit as flyback energy...(a
beneficial part of the conservation of energy law).
:S:MarkSCoffman
Quote from: NextGen67 on March 23, 2010, 08:39:47 PM
Reason being the IRF640 needs quite some energy to actually switch it ON, so *if* some of this energy triples through the circuit, it will be amplified and in such a way *could* be responsible for the cap 'charge up'... However a replacement mosfet (STS2DNF30L) for example which requires *way* less energy to switch on, hence would *also* cause *less* energy triple trough the circuit... Now *when* the STS2DNF30L results in a *better* cap 'charge up' then the IRF640 it can be argued leakage is not the cause.
On the other hand, if the STS2DNF30L shows a cap 'charge up' that is far lower then when he used the IRF640, it can be argued that indeed the hidden leakage could be responsible for the cap 'charge up'.
Sounds plausible ?
--
NextGen67
Yes, this is correct. I am hoping to get a mosfet transistor that requires
*less drive voltage* and shows spiffy ie not sluggish Coil resonant effects.
Our mosfet gate drive voltage at ~11Vpp is too high in my opinion. We
are feeding our transistor too heavily for what it is doing and it's
passing through that power. Ok, boost/buck converter using the
parasitic inductance of the long clip leads...I don't care how it
accomplishes this task of raising it's bulk input voltage... If we feed it
less it's going to have less available. The combination of lower drive
and lower mosfet capacitance is much lower possible energy pass
through potential, Therefore if the capacitor still gains our gain must be
occurring from overunity. Unfortunately light rider's 4N35
opto doesn't suggest this. With the 4n35 we only feed the transistor
with energy we already have in the circuit. Things seem to get sluggish.
The reason I like the pick-up coil funding the gate energy is that; The main
toroid coil is going to take care of itself. Energy put out will reasonate
back in plus maybe some overunity gain. Only if the pickup coil is coupled
to main coil unit for unit will we never be able to accomplish anything.
As we will push down the gate energy required, less will be taken but
still no overunity gain might be present to raise the bulk capacitors.
The other thing is if the transistor wants to see more gate voltage
for it's operation for some reason (maybe I'm not as hot as I think
I am on designing with fet's) we could use that transformer to push
up the gate voltage while we decrease inputted power. This is kind of
a secondary cross check to decrease gate drive power if we have
really succeeded in increasing mosfet input impedance. If we can drive
the transistor at the voltage of the signal generator based in overunity
energy...ie not drawing anymore from bulk. Then the bulk capacitor is going
to charge up in exactly the same way as it did with the signal generator.
We don't really care, at this time, what circuit elements are causing that
bulk voltage increase.
Also, gotoluc could put the 100ohm resistor into the gate circuit
and show that it doesn't effect things there. Then the current
waveform going into the gate of the mosfet could be directly
seen and be measurable. Also reductions or increases with other
transistors would be measurable as a change in current.
:S:MarkSCoffman
An ALD110800A, requirers very little energy to switch on, has C's next to nothing,
but it's RDS on is at some 500 Ohm if i read the specs correct. Also the max of it is 10Volt.
but well... 0.1 volt threshold is quite something.
I take the slow way, like to see Luc's results between the mentioned Mosfets (or comparable types)...
See the return Cap charge that they can deliver... Pick-up coil I see as secondary to fix it's problem.
Tough Luc's seems just now to got some 350uA (123uW), while still adding a little bit in the bulk Caps.
--
Nextgen67
Nexgen67,
ALD110800A is not a power transistor...Rds = 500Ohms is
unacceptable if driving a 6ohm coil.
@Gotoluc,
Hi,
I've not posted on this forum for over a year I reckon, but your experiment looks very promising.
Have you checked to make sure that no power can be added to the output through the gate of the mosfet?
There is a lot on this thread to read through.
Also I am still not sure if your coils are wound so the 2 coils appose each other, just like in a common mode choke.
In common mode chokes you can have split winding and parallel winding, yours is split.
The fact that your inductance is so high (more than the sum of the two) would indicate these coils are not wire in common mode config but are wired in series.
I have lots of cores to test out this idea with and a dual pulse circuit to allow the pulse current to be made square. (Thanks to Paul Lowrance and his mini orbo pulse circuit).
http://globalfreeenergy.info/2010/03/
Rob
Quote from: mscoffman on March 24, 2010, 11:37:53 AM
Nexgen67,
ALD110800A is not a power transistor...Rds = 500Ohms is
unacceptable if driving a 6ohm coil.
I know, that is why I didn't include a data sheet. But just to mention that
*might* everything go well and positive, there are probably some jewels of
mosfets around if we hunt long enough. ;)
Also, luc's above post [ http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=8892.msg234171#msg234171 (http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=8892.msg234171#msg234171) ]
comes to more then about 1/4th already of what is needed to run the circuit...
If I'm correct [its late and my mind is blur], his mosfet there needs 450uW to
operate, and the pick-up is delivering some 123uW... That's not bad already.
EDIT: yes, thought already something is wrong... Think its more then 2,80mW is
needed... In such a case we're far from powering it yet.. To late already, need
to hit the dark room.
--
NextGen67
Quote from: mscoffman on March 24, 2010, 11:07:50 AM
...
Also, gotoluc could put the 100ohm resistor into the gate circuit
and show that it doesn't effect things there. Then the current
waveform going into the gate of the mosfet could be directly
seen and be measurable. Also reductions or increases with other
transistors would be measurable as a change in current.
:S:MarkSCoffman
Hi Mark,
But Luc has been putting the 100 Ohm resistor in series into the gate circuit you must have missed that. He showed actual scope shots already taken directly across the series 100 Ohm, see here the waveforms (click on the quote's link in bold just in next line):
Quote from: gotoluc on March 22, 2010, 02:27:00 PM
.....
Link to video demo: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MX2nZSOhxfc
1st Shot is Scope probe across Generator input, the other probe across a 100 Ohm resistor in series with Generator ground and coil tuned to send back most energy.
...
It is unusual to place a series resistor into the Ground wire instead of the "hot" gate wire BUT it is equivalent as long as the circuit to be measured is GND independent and the signal generator GND does not meet with the GNDs of any other measuring instruments used. In Luc's setup this is nicely met. This way Luc solved the problem that his two channel scope inputs have a common GND.
rgds, Gyula
Its interesting that if a NE555 timer is used to supply pulses to a mosfet which is switching a coil connected between its drain and supply rail, whilst the 555 output is high, current from the supply rail will be fed through the mosfet drain to gate and through the 555 pin 3 output into its supply rail. If a cap is placed across the 555 supply rails, the current fed back will charge the cap sufficiently to power the 555 timer, so that the normal supply to the 555 can be disconnected. I first noticed this when I was pulsing a DC contactor from a 30V supply. The 555 was supplied from the 30V power rail with a 15V zener stabilised supply, smoothed with a 100uF cap.
Hoppy
Quote from: MeggerMan on March 24, 2010, 12:04:02 PM
@Gotoluc,
Hi,
I've not posted on this forum for over a year I reckon, but your experiment looks very promising.
Have you checked to make sure that no power can be added to the output through the gate of the mosfet?
There is a lot on this thread to read through.
Also I am still not sure if your coils are wound so the 2 coils appose each other, just like in a common mode choke.
In common mode chokes you can have split winding and parallel winding, yours is split.
The fact that your inductance is so high (more than the sum of the two) would indicate these coils are not wire in common mode config but are wired in series.
I have lots of cores to test out this idea with and a dual pulse circuit to allow the pulse current to be made square. (Thanks to Paul Lowrance and his mini orbo pulse circuit).
http://globalfreeenergy.info/2010/03/
Rob
Quote from: MeggerMan on March 24, 2010, 12:04:02 PM
....
Also I am still not sure if your coils are wound so the 2 coils appose each other, just like in a common mode choke.
In common mode chokes you can have split winding and parallel winding, yours is split.
The fact that your inductance is so high (more than the sum of the two) would indicate these coils are not wire in common mode config but are wired in series.
I have lots of cores to test out this idea with and a dual pulse circuit to allow the pulse current to be made square. (Thanks to Paul Lowrance and his mini orbo pulse circuit).
http://globalfreeenergy.info/2010/03/
Rob
Hi Rob,
Re on common mode choke: you are correct the winding technique Luc used for his toroidal coils is really the one as the so called common mode chokes are made BUT the big difference is the way how they are connected: Luc connected the two coils
in series aiding i.e. the MUTUAL inductances of the two coils add to the sum of the individual inductances in series, so that the resultant inductance is nearly the 4 times of a single coil, L
resultant=(L
1+L
2+2M where L1=L2=L in the equation (the two coils are assumed to have the same inductance which is nearly true and M is nearly L because in ring cores the coefficience of coupling is nearly 1 ). (A useful link on this is here: http://www.daycounter.com/LabBook/Mutual-Inductance.phtml )
I hope this helps clarify your doubt above.
rgds, Gyula
Quote from: gyulasun on March 24, 2010, 02:52:04 PM
...
But Luc has been putting the 100 Ohm resistor in series into the gate circuit you must have missed that. He showed actual scope shots already taken directly across the series 100 Ohm, see here the waveforms (click on the quote's link in bold just in next line):
...
rgds, Gyula
OK yes, I see. Thanks for bringing that up. That makes the 2Sxx mosfet
look much better with only 1.4Vpp across the 100ohm resister...
You know what, if gotoluc looks on his signal generator he will see
the output impedance specified probably like 60ohms. If he put a
60ohm resistor where where the signal generator leads terminate
to ground right before the circuit he may find that it squares up
the input signal trace significantly. You can see that the transistor
is beginning to convert voltage variations to current meaning that
it is seeing the input signal variations at the top of the square wave.
I think a signal generator termination resistor might square that signal up.
The signal generator will be working slightly harder but the level control
will bring the signal voltage back up to where it's needed
I wonder what the total circuit behavior *is* with this 2Sxx transistor?
The darned thing still has a high Ciss of nearly 1000pf or more so I don't
want to spend to much time on it if we could get one with a lower Ciss.
IRF640 drive max at 360mW peak
2Sxx drive max at 42mW peak
So we are driving it with about 1/9 of the power, via drive voltage variation
alone. Man I wonder where that lower figure would end up with smaller
Ciss? We are getting impedance matching probs between the signal
generator and circuit. So I wonder how the circuit is behaving with this
transistor? Gain in the bulk caps or not?
:S:Mark Coffman
Quote from: Hoppy on March 24, 2010, 04:46:39 PM
Its interesting that if a NE555 timer is used to supply pulses to a mosfet which is switching a coil connected between its drain and supply rail, whilst the 555 output is high, current from the supply rail will be fed through the mosfet drain to gate and through the 555 pin 3 output into its supply rail. If a cap is placed across the 555 supply rails, the current fed back will charge the cap sufficiently to power the 555 timer, so that the normal supply to the 555 can be disconnected. I first noticed this when I was pulsing a DC contactor from a 30V supply. The 555 was supplied from the 30V power rail with a 15V zener stabilised supply, smoothed with a 100uF cap.
Hoppy
Hi Hoppy,
This is an interesting observation and you nicely described what you found, however, some further notices may be in order.
The energy coming from the drain side back to the gate is caused by the drain gate interelectrode capacitance and depending on the type of the power MOSFET, this capacitance can be quite high to be able to cause the situation you described. IF you choose another MOSFET type that has a few pFs only between the drain gate, then this situation cannot really happen as severely as you found, of course this also depends on the working frequency too. In Luc's circuit the frequency has been only as high as 50-60kHz or so and the IRF640 drain source cap value, C
rss is about 53pF at 25V drain voltage, this gives about X
L=40-50 kOHm capacitive reactance so high that significant current cannot really flow through it. Especially when there are no voltage spikes at the drain side because of tuning for resonance there, I think of the lack of high voltage difference between the drain gate -- this is the second reason why in Luc's circuit this is not experienced. (of course if he did experience it, it would be an unwanted phenomena because it would steal energy from the output resonant circuit.)
So the energy coming back via the C
rss also depends much on the instantenous drain voltage wrt the gate, and also, the higher this cap value, the bigger the energy coming back, at a given frequency.
You surely can recall other members finding that the body, (the casing) of the 555 integrated circuit sometimes gets heated up or suddenly simply go wrong after working for a few minutes, when directly drives the gate of MOSFETs that switches a coil via the drain, especially if the coil at the output has a resonant frequency that is far from the input drive frequency, hence big, nasty voltage spikes can couple back to the gate to find the output circuits inside the 555, beyond its Pin 3.
While the amount of the unwanted energy coupled back can really supply a 555 as it were a separate power supply, I think it is an unwanted situation in most of the applications and you would have to make sure to limit the amount of the current coupled back, afterall it steals from the output energy, and make sure the 555 or the 15V Zener for instance will not overdissipate. Also, when you wish to switch ON such a driving circuit that gets its supply from the drainside, it is not at all a 100% sure it can start again after a switch OFF because it would have no or very little supply voltage due to the initial lack of the big spikes at the drain side (a static 30V at the drain cannot couple back much current via the drain gate capacitance to start up the 555).
Sorry for the long 'rambling' I felt it interesting to discuss.
rgds, Gyula
Quote from: gyulasun on March 24, 2010, 06:29:42 PM
Hi Hoppy,
This is an interesting observation and you nicely described what you found, however, some further notices may be in order.
The energy coming from the drain side back to the gate is caused by the drain gate interelectrode capacitance and depending on the type of the power MOSFET, this capacitance can be quite high to be able to cause the situation you described. IF you choose another MOSFET type that has a few pFs only between the drain gate, then this situation cannot really happen as severely as you found, of course this also depends on the working frequency too. In Luc's circuit the frequency has been only as high as 50-60kHz or so and the IRF640 drain source cap value, Crss is about 53pF at 25V drain voltage, this gives about XL=40-50 kOHm capacitive reactance so high that significant current cannot really flow through it. Especially when there are no voltage spikes at the drain side because of tuning for resonance there, I think of the lack of high voltage difference between the drain gate -- this is the second reason why in Luc's circuit this is not experienced. (of course if he did experience it, it would be an unwanted phenomena because it would steal energy from the output resonant circuit.)
So the energy coming back via the Crss also depends much on the instantenous drain voltage wrt the gate, and also, the higher this cap value, the bigger the energy coming back, at a given frequency.
You surely can recall other members finding that the body, (the casing) of the 555 integrated circuit sometimes gets heated up or suddenly simply go wrong after working for a few minutes, when directly drives the gate of MOSFETs that switches a coil via the drain, especially if the coil at the output has a resonant frequency that is far from the input drive frequency, hence big, nasty voltage spikes can couple back to the gate to find the output circuits inside the 555, beyond its Pin 3.
While the amount of the unwanted energy coupled back can really supply a 555 as it were a separate power supply, I think it is an unwanted situation in most of the applications and you would have to make sure to limit the amount of the current coupled back, afterall it steals from the output energy, and make sure the 555 or the 15V Zener for instance will not overdissipate. Also, when you wish to switch ON such a driving circuit that gets its supply from the drainside, it is not at all a 100% sure it can start again after a switch OFF because it would have no or very little supply voltage due to the initial lack of the big spikes at the drain side (a static 30V at the drain cannot couple back much current via the drain gate capacitance to start up the 555).
Sorry for the long 'rambling' I felt it interesting to discuss.
rgds, Gyula
Right, the Crss spec value is the reverse source to gate capacitance.
In the IR640 it is typically 60pf. Makes no sense for a cap, but it
does for a semiconductor device. The positive spike of the Ids
caused by the coil can come through that so you essentially have a
output powered NE555. I think I would put a 1n914 diode from the gate
drive line to pin3 to guarantee what was going on. We estimated that
cmos NE555 took only 300uW to run and the zener diode doesn't turn on
until it's back biased to 15V protecting the NE555 from too much kick.
Would it work in our case as yours was driving into 30Vdc? It wouldn't
hurt to try and maybe would drain off some gate charge. A normal
NE555 I'm pretty sure it wouldn't. We would have to guarantee full
drive voltage and current.
Bad news; in the STS2DNF30L the Crss parameter it is only 11pf!
There is something called reverse amplifier gain or reverse
transconductance. And this Crss provides the basis for
that. This can also lead to self oscillations in linear AC amps.
:S:MarkCoffman
Hi Gyula,
Thanks for expanding on my observation. I should have added that I have a freewheel diode across the coil, as in my application the coil is operating a heavy duty DC contactor coil with a resistance of 20R. My pulse rate is slow at about 1 Hz. The mosfet is an IRFZ48N (Crss - 200-270pf), which as you say is high enough to account for the effect.
Hoppy
Quote from: gyulasun on March 24, 2010, 06:29:42 PM
Hi Hoppy,
This is an interesting observation and you nicely described what you found, however, some further notices may be in order.
The energy coming from the drain side back to A is caused by the drain gate interelectrode capacitance and depending on the type of the power MOSFET, this capacitance can be quite high to be able to cause the situation you described. IF you choose another MOSFET type that has a few pFs only between the drain gate, then this situation cannot really happen as severely as you found, of course this also depends on the working frequency too. In Luc's circuit the frequency has been only as high as 50-60kHz or so and the IRF640 drain source cap value, Crss is about 53pF at 25V drain voltage, this gives about XL=40-50 kOHm capacitive reactance so high that significant current cannot really flow through it. Especially when there are no voltage spikes at the drain side because of tuning for resonance there, I think of the lack of high voltage difference between the drain gate -- this is the second reason why in Luc's circuit this is not experienced. (of course if he did experience it, it would be an unwanted phenomena because it would steal energy from the output resonant circuit.)
So the energy coming back via the Crss also depends much on the instantenous drain voltage wrt the gate, and also, the higher this cap value, the bigger the energy coming back, at a given frequency.
You surely can recall other members finding that the body, (the casing) of the 555 integrated circuit sometimes gets heated up or suddenly simply go wrong after working for a few minutes, when directly drives the gate of MOSFETs that switches a coil via the drain, especially if the coil at the output has a resonant frequency that is far from the input drive frequency, hence big, nasty voltage spikes can couple back to the gate to find the output circuits inside the 555, beyond its Pin 3.
While the amount of the unwanted energy coupled back can really supply a 555 as it were a separate power supply, I think it is an unwanted situation in most of the applications and you would have to make sure to limit the amount of the current coupled back, afterall it steals from the output energy, and make sure the 555 or the 15V Zener for instance will not overdissipate. Also, when you wish to switch ON such a A circuit that gets its supply from the drainside, it is not at all a 100% sure it can start again after a switch OFF because it would have no or very little supply voltage due to the initial lack of the big spikes at the drain side (a static 30V at the drain cannot couple back much current via the drain gate capacitance to start up the 555).
Sorry for the long 'rambling' I felt it interesting to discuss.
rgds, Gyula
Quote from: gyulasun on March 24, 2010, 05:08:16 PM
Hi Rob,
Re on common mode choke: you are correct the winding technique Luc used for his toroidal coils is really the one as the so called common mode chokes are made BUT the big difference is the way how they are connected: Luc connected the two coils in series aiding i.e. the MUTUAL inductances of the two coils add to the sum of the individual inductances in series, so that the resultant inductance is nearly the 4 times of a single coil, Lresultant=(L1+L2+2M where L1=L2=L in the equation (the two coils are assumed to have the same inductance which is nearly true and M is nearly L because in ring cores the coefficience of coupling is nearly 1 ). (A useful link on this is here: http://www.daycounter.com/LabBook/Mutual-Inductance.phtml )
I hope this helps clarify your doubt above.
rgds, Gyula
Hi Gyula,
yes, I did a drawing on paper and showed the current direction and the field direction and it makes sense now, its because the windings are wound in different directions that threw me, but in essence the you can wind the coils around the core in either direction. Its direction of the current flow for a piece of wire laying on the core that determines the field direction.
On the low power front, I have some ICM7555 low power timers to test out.
http://www.intersil.com/data/fn/fn2867.pdf
Around 40uA supply current then its up to you to pick and choose the right timing capacitors and resistors to keep any additional power required to a minimum.
Also I have a LTC4446 mosfet driver to test out.
Rob
Quote from: NextGen67 on March 24, 2010, 07:20:01 AM
What do you get if you take out the pickup coil in the above test (still -.000006 or less or more), and how does the scope shot looks like then?
--
NextGen67
Hi NextGen67,
I removed the pickup coil and the meter went to -.000025 and the scope shot is the fist one below.
I attached the previous scope shot below it (with pickup coil) for comparing.
Luc
@ everyone,
what do you think of the following mosfet specs.
www.irf.com/product-info/datasheets/data/irlml2502.pdf
www.irf.com/product-info/datasheets/data/irlml6402pbf.pdf
www.irf.com/product-info/datasheets/data/irf7700.pdf
I'm looking for a 20v mosfet that I can buy on ebay and the above are available
Luc
Quote from: gyulasun on March 24, 2010, 09:49:47 AM
Hi Luc,
Did you add the capacitance in parallel with the toroidal coil?
Yes Gyula, the capacitance is in parallel with the toroidal coil (480pf)
Quote from: gyulasun on March 24, 2010, 09:49:47 AM
Did you have any capacitance in the pickup coil circuit to make it resonant at the toroidal coil's lower resonant frequency? The two freqs have to be the same to get the most output. Hint: at the best setup as you wrote above (150mV across 100Ohm etc), try to place capacitors in series with the 1KOhm load to reach a resonant pickup coil situation (or as Mark suggested, connect it in parallel and use an audio transformer to step down the output power from the pickup coil), to approximate best a matched condition between the pickup circuit as a whole and the 1k load.
Thanks, Gyula
No, I did not add capacitance on the pickup coil. I tried quickly but could not find something that worked. This needs to be experimented with and something I'll look into.
Luc
Quote from: gyulasun on March 24, 2010, 02:52:04 PM
Hi Mark,
But Luc has been putting the 100 Ohm resistor in series into the gate circuit you must have missed that. He showed actual scope shots already taken directly across the series 100 Ohm, see here the waveforms (click on the quote's link in bold just in next line):
Yes Mark! the 100 Ohm resistor has been there for some time.
Quote from: gyulasun on March 24, 2010, 02:52:04 PM
It is unusual to place a series resistor into the Ground wire instead of the "hot" gate wire BUT it is equivalent as long as the circuit to be measured is GND independent and the signal generator GND does not meet with the GNDs of any other measuring instruments used. In Luc's setup this is nicely met. This way Luc solved the problem that his two channel scope inputs have a common GND.
rgds, Gyula
Yes Gyula! exactly why I have it on the SG ground, so I can use both probes at the same time since they have a common ground.
Luc
Quote from: gotoluc on March 25, 2010, 02:51:58 PM
@ everyone,
what do you think of the following mosfet specs.
www.irf.com/product-info/datasheets/data/irlml2502.pdf
www.irf.com/product-info/datasheets/data/irlml6402pbf.pdf
www.irf.com/product-info/datasheets/data/irf7700.pdf
I'm looking for a 20v mosfet that I can buy on ebay and the above are available
Luc
---
You should try a termination resistor on your signal generator
with the 2Sxxx transistor. to see if you can clean up its operation.
This transistor is the best you've tried in terms of lowering
gate energy but input noise is now beginning to get the best
of it. Any overunity detected?
---
Boy, these are a mixed bag;
www.irf.com/product-info/datasheets/data/irlml2502.pdf
- Yes, Moderate Ciss = 760pf (could do better but is OK)
www.irf.com/product-info/datasheets/data/irlml6402pbf.pdf
- P channel mosfet is a different device!...Would require wiring changes
to put mosfet towards positive battery above coil...gate pulls down
to turn On. Compatible with opto NPN bipolar output transistors. Check
Drain, and Source connections Specs are OK. Ciss=644uf Moderate,
I am not against it. Compatible with NE555 output...Don't
know about SG3525 compatability (probably not -circuit maybe
reconfigurable)
www.irf.com/product-info/datasheets/data/irf7700.pdf
- P channel mosfet a different device!...
Ciss = 4.3nf => no good, way too high, a high current DC device _
I am against it.
:S:MarkSCoffman
Hi Mark,
thanks for the reply.
My singal generator has a 50 Ohm impedance I think. Model Wavetek 134
Are you saying to add a 50 Ohm resistor between the hot and ground of the Wavetek and connect from the resistor to the gate?... if so, I did try it and still have the sine wave across the 100 Ohm current shunt.
Thanks for your input on the mosfets. I did not notice some of them were P channel. It should not be a problem but would use them only if the specs were great. Did not notice the other one was in nf :P
If you can have a look on eBay .com to find a better spec one then the irlml2502 would appreciate it.
Thanks for your help and time.
Luc
Hi Mark,
here are the scope shots. First is with 50 resistor and second is without resistor. I do agree that it makes the pulses square but it takes more current then without the resistor.
Both were adjusted to minimum voltage to trigger gate.
Any idea why this is ???... this is the problem I have when I connect the 555. It keeps the pulses square and does not give as good of results compared to using the wavetek with rounded pulses.
Luc
@everyone,
decided to try Triangle wave to trigger the mosfet and it works!
With the scope shot below I have 0.26vdc on the pickup coil 1K resistor and -.000010 returning to cap bank with attached 12.88vdc battery.
Less current through the shunt. I also had to drop the volts division to 100mv to show more details.
Luc
Quote from: gotoluc on March 25, 2010, 04:34:49 PM
Hi Mark,
here are the scope shots. First is with 50 resistor and second is without resistor. I do agree that it makes the pulses square but it takes more current then without the resistor.
Both were adjusted to minimum voltage to trigger gate.
Any idea why this is ???... this is the problem I have when I connect the 555. It keeps the pulses square and does not give as good of results compared to using the wavetek with rounded pulses.
Luc
Hi Luc,
The near sinusoid waveform with the spikes across the 100 Ohm resistor comes from the fact that you use a 10:1 probe backwards i.e. its output goes to the signal generator and its input tip (which includes a series 9 MOhm resistor as usual) goes to the gate of the MOSFET.
This means that this series 9 MOhm makes the gate high impedance and this way the gate can easily pick up the stray E field from the toroid coil (the sinusoid voltage also has the same freq like the signal generator output, 33.7 kHz), or if it does not pickup the the E field, then this sinusoid voltage may also come from the drain side via the C
rss drain gate capacitance and it is as big as the scope shows because the gate has a high impedance.
How to solve? Could use a piece of 50 Ohm coax cable directly from the signal generator input to the gate, a cable length of 0.5-1 meter long.
EDIT Maybe the 50 Ohm low impedance the gate now will "see" from the signal gen output would mean you will find similar NOT as good results like you find with the 555.
You would have to 'tinker' again for achieving the same good sweet point if you change to coax cable.
Thanks for answering my earlier questions.
Re on you ebay MOSFET types: they have very good low value threshold voltages, a .5 to 1V advantage wrt the 2SK... type, maybe this can compensate for the moderately high 700-800pF input capacitance. If you are careful with the voltages, the P channel type can be "handled".
(The third type is out of question indeed because of its 4.3nF input cap.)
So the first two types are worth trying, hopefully they have good prices.
rgds, Gyula
PS Or you use an 1:1 probe, not a 10:1 from the signal gen? Cannot recall.
Quote from: gotoluc on March 25, 2010, 04:34:49 PM
Hi Mark,
here are the scope shots. First is with 50 resistor and second is without resistor. I do agree that it makes the pulses square but it takes more current then without the resistor.
Both were adjusted to minimum voltage to trigger gate.
Any idea why this is ???... this is the problem I have when I connect the 555. It keeps the pulses square and does not give as good of results compared to using the wavetek with rounded pulses.
Luc
Excellent scope pic's. Well both the signal and the noise has to flow
through the terminating resistor and the signal is winning power wise
with the resistor. Notice how the signal *Transistions* are much more
rapid and much squarer. The Fourier decomposition to sinewaves
would show much greater high frequency action with the squarer wave.
The other thing is that clearly your coil seems to be resonating at
the frequency you are driving it at. This is seen in the one to one
lower power sinewave base seen in the gate current. The pulses
are due to coil inductance. The sinewave is due to coil re sonace and
you are *not* seeing it in the generator voltage with the t-resistor.
The coil power is beginning to overpower the transistor. And that
is beginning to effect your signal generator leads as noise in those
drooping high levels. With the cleaner signal you can tell that
the resonance sinewave is not a function of drive voltage.
On the NE555 how are you powering it? It may make sense to use
an external ~5volt dc supply for the NE555 then a voltage divider
to set the voltage. for comparison to the SigGen. You need to look
at the *exact upper and lower gate voltage levels* If you just want to
convert the signal to be *more* sinewave like and slower use an RC filter.
Hopefully you have already tried that gate series variable resistor. ie VrCiss =
RC when used with the NE555. In this circuit you won't necessarily get any
operational browny points for using clean digital signal level drives. It's
nicer to look at though. RC filter = series resistor then cap to ground.
put the scope on the actual gate. If you still come up with the same
answers then perhaps OU is based more in coil resonance and less in
the high speed inductive kick?
So:
a) set up variable gate resistor, tune with t-resistor vs tune with remote
powered NE555. Should be same. Also *maybe* same now as witout Vr and
t-resistor.
b) Set up RC filter, tune with t-resistor vs tune with remote powered NE555
Should be the same. Also should be same now without RC filter and
without t-resistor.
c) NE555 under remote power vs NE555 under bulk or pickup power with
voltage set exactly the same - difference in operation? = difference of
power drain of NE555 on operation of circuit.
:S:MarkSCoffman
Quote from: gyulasun on March 25, 2010, 05:45:10 PM
Hi Luc,
The near sinusoid waveform with the spikes across the 100 Ohm resistor comes from the fact that you use a 10:1 probe backwards i.e. its output goes to the signal generator and its input tip (which includes a series 9 MOhm resistor as usual) goes to the gate of the MOSFET.
This means that this series 9 MOhm makes the gate high impedance and this way the gate can easily pick up the stray E field from the toroid coil (the sinusoid voltage also has the same freq like the signal generator output, 33.7 kHz), or if it does not pickup the the E field, then this sinusoid voltage may also come from the drain side via the Crss drain gate capacitance and it is as big as the scope shows because the gate has a high impedance.
How to solve? Could use a piece of 50 Ohm coax cable directly from the signal generator input to the gate, a cable length of 0.5-1 meter long.
EDIT Maybe the 50 Ohm low impedance the gate now will "see" from the signal gen output would mean you will find similar NOT as good results like you find with the 555.
You would have to 'tinker' again for achieving the same good sweet point if you change to coax cable.
Thanks for answering my earlier questions.
Re on you ebay MOSFET types: they have very good low value threshold voltages, a .5 to 1V advantage wrt the 2SK... type, maybe this can compensate for the moderately high 700-800pF input capacitance. If you are careful with the voltages, the P channel type can be "handled".
(The third type is out of question indeed because of its 4.3nF input cap.)
So the first two types are worth trying, hopefully they have good prices.
rgds, Gyula
PS Or you use an 1:1 probe, not a 10:1 from the signal gen? Cannot recall.
Hi Gyula,
thanks for the details. The scope probe I use on the Generator output has both X1 and X10. I only use it on the X1 setting which has a 220 Ohm resistance from what I can measure.
In the first scope shot of the post in question: http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=8892.msg234503#msg234503 The scope probe is not used. I have my alligator clips (50cm or 20" long) connected at the 50 Ohm resistor across the Hot and Ground of the BNC output connector of the Wavetek and still have the sine wave. So I don't think it's coming from the probe.
Thanks for your opinion on the ebay mosfet's
Luc
Luc, it is interesting that with the triangle waves the waveform across the 100 Ohm looks like correct.
Then the sinusoid wave is still a mistery... Maybe it is picked up by simple induction from the main toroid coil?
Gyula
Quote from: gyulasun on March 25, 2010, 05:45:10 PM
Hi Luc,
The near sinusoid waveform with the spikes across the 100 Ohm resistor comes from the fact that you use a 10:1 probe backwards i.e. its output goes to the signal generator and its input tip (which includes a series 9 MOhm resistor as usual) goes to the gate of the MOSFET.
This means that this series 9 MOhm makes the gate high impedance and this way the gate can easily pick up the stray E field from the toroid coil (the sinusoid voltage also has the same freq like the signal generator output, 33.7 kHz), or if it does not pickup the the E field, then this sinusoid voltage may also come from the drain side via the Crss drain gate capacitance and it is as big as the scope shows because the gate has a high impedance.
How to solve? Could use a piece of 50 Ohm coax cable directly from the signal generator input to the gate, a cable length of 0.5-1 meter long.
EDIT Maybe the 50 Ohm low impedance the gate now will "see" from the signal gen output would mean you will find similar NOT as good results like you find with the 555.
You would have to 'tinker' again for achieving the same good sweet point if you change to coax cable.
Thanks for answering my earlier questions.
Re on you ebay MOSFET types: they have very good low value threshold voltages, a .5 to 1V advantage wrt the 2SK... type, maybe this can compensate for the moderately high 700-800pF input capacitance. If you are careful with the voltages, the P channel type can be "handled".
(The third type is out of question indeed because of its 4.3nF input cap.)
So the first two types are worth trying, hopefully they have good prices.
rgds, Gyula
PS Or you use an 1:1 probe, not a 10:1 from the signal gen? Cannot recall.
@gyulason,
I can't believe there is either a 1meg or 9meg R in series with the signal
generator as it wouldn't drive into a 50Ohms resistor at all....Measure
with DVM ohmmeter. Scope probes are generally 20Ohms impedance coax
at their highest frequency range so unless we are running at many MHz
the difference 20 vs 50Ohms won't matter. 20Ohms=RC || RL + dcR
So 50ohm video coax for a lab would be nice but not necessary at
these low frequencies. The t-resistor is desirable for Sig Gen.
---
@gotoluc
Well, try a sinewave then. Maybe OU doesn't like inductive kicks?
A sinewave is it's own Fourier Decomposition. It doesn't have any
additional HF signal components or steps. Resonance is a sinewave.
NE555 + RC filter ~= waveform. There is an Intersil cmos IC
somewhat like the NE555 that outputs a sinewave and squarewave
too. I think there is an app note that shows triangle wave generation.
It takes extra energy to generate a squarewave.
---
Man this looks close! You should boost the resistor up on pickup coil
to get 4.2Vdc like 6Kohm - perhaps insert the full diode bridge across
the pickup coil.
:S:MarkSCoffman
Quote from: mscoffman on March 25, 2010, 06:04:07 PM
Excellent scope pic's. Well both the signal and the noise has to flow
through the terminating resistor and the signal is winning power wise
with the resistor. Notice how the signal *Transistions* are much more
rapid and much squarer. The Fourier decomposition to sinewaves
would show much greater high frequency action with the squarer wave.
The other thing is that clearly your coil seems to be resonating at
the frequency you are driving it at. This is seen in the one to one
lower power sinewave base seen in the gate current. The pulses
are due to coil inductance. The sinewave is due to coil re sonace and
you are *not* seeing it in the generator voltage with the t-resistor.
The coil power is beginning to overpower the transistor. And that
is beginning to effect your signal generator leads as noise in those
drooping high levels. With the cleaner signal you can tell that
the resonance sinewave is not a function of drive voltage.
On the NE555 how are you powering it? It may make sense to use
an external ~5volt dc supply for the NE555 then a voltage divider
to set the voltage. for comparison to the SigGen. You need to look
at the *exact upper and lower gate voltage levels* If you just want to
convert the signal to be *more* sinewave like and slower use an RC filter.
Hopefully you have already tried that gate series variable resistor. ie VrCiss =
RC when used with the NE555. In this circuit you won't necessarily get any
operational browny points for using clean digital signal level drives. It's
nicer to look at though. RC filter = series resistor then cap to ground.
put the scope on the actual gate. If you still come up with the same
answers then perhaps OU is based more in coil resonance and less in
the high speed inductive kick?
So:
a) set up variable gate resistor, tune with t-resistor vs tune with remote
powered NE555. Should be same. Also *maybe* same now as witout Vr and
t-resistor.
b) Set up RC filter, tune with t-resistor vs tune with remote powered NE555
Should be the same. Also should be same now without RC filter and
without t-resistor.
c) NE555 under remote power vs NE555 under bulk or pickup power with
voltage set exactly the same - difference in operation? = difference of
power drain of NE555 on operation of circuit.
:S:MarkSCoffman
Hi Mark.
I think we are getting closer to what is needed to make this circuit work.
If I use the 555 and match the pulses to the exact specs as the Wavetek output (I mean perfect match) and connect the 555 to the gate then the sine wave is gone and so is the coil sending back energy. I connect the Wavetek and all is back.
Something inside the Wavetek is allowing the gate to switch and the coil resonance to come through the switch and shunt resistor. Using the 555 it loses this since you don't see the sine wave on across the shunt resistor, which maybe a braking effect on the resonating coil.
Could it be that the Wavetek output has an impedance matching transformer and this is what is helping not to cancel the coils resonance as what is leaking trough the switch is resonating in the Wavetek impedance matching coil?
If this is what is happening then the sine wave that is going back through the shunt resistor should not be calculated as power that is coming from the generator but rather from the coils supply.
Are you following me on this? Let me know what you think
Luc
Quote from: gotoluc on March 25, 2010, 07:22:04 PM
Hi Mark.
I think we are getting closer to what is needed to make this circuit work.
If I use the 555 and match the pulses to the exact specs as the Wavetek output (I mean perfect match) and connect the 555 to the gate then the sine wave is gone and so is the coil sending back energy. I connect the Wavetek and all is back.
Something inside the Wavetek is allowing the gate to switch and the coil resonance to come through the switch and shunt resistor. Using the 555 it loses this since you don't see the sine wave on across the shunt resistor, which maybe a braking effect on the resonating coil.
Could it be that the Wavetek output has an impedance matching transformer and this is what is helping not to cancel the coils resonance as what is leaking trough the switch is resonating in the Wavetek impedance matching coil?
If this is what is happening then the sine wave that is going back through the shunt resistor should not be calculated as power that is coming from the generator but rather from the coils supply.
Are you following me on this? Let me know what you think
Luc
Yes, I think it has something to do with the
100 ohm resistor in the ground lead of the signal
generator. The sinewave is possibly fake as current
goes.
Is the NE555 grounded? Or is it grounded through
100ohms?
Is the NE555 remotely powered by a dc supply?
Try implacing and unimplacing a 10.0ohm resistor
across the 100ohm resistor and see if that doesn't
cause a relative decrease in the ratio of this sinewave
to the rest of the signal. Try to see if shorting the
100Ohm resistor changes circuit OU behavior.
Try attaching a 100ohm resistor in the ground lead
of the NE555? Finally it may be time to implement
the opto remotely powered by a dc supply. That
should behave just like the NE555 when led is
driven by signal generator. You know a 1:1
isolating transformer in the SigGen leads could
show something too.
If the NE555 is grounded then the output driver
impedance of the NE555 can inhibit formation of that
sinewave but the mosfet transistor may be reverse
amplifying it when it exists. Making a resistor-to-
ground makes the NE555 effectively less powerful.
Also try leaving the SigGen Ground in place when
operating with the NE555.
Something in the above should help determine the
problem. The main things are the probable grounding
of the NE555 and the probable bulk capacitor or
pickup coil suppling the NE555 power.
Secondary is 100ohm resistor in the ground lead
of the signal generator. Or some 60Hz AC pickup
in the ground lead of the signal generator. Or a
SigGen signal on the ground lead between it's
ground and utility ground.
:S:MarkCoffman
To eliminate ground you have to connect 555 to capacitor bank as a power source.
Can you precharge capacitors , connect 555 into it ,connect battery for a moment to start oscillations and look what next ?
Hi everyone,
I have an update video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Gy-kkJKNOU
Scope shot is from video test.
Luc
Tutorial of Series and Parallel LC Resonant Circuits, http://www.scribd.com/doc/28956060/Resonance-Tutorial
[Edit:] @Luc, Good update on the SK2806-01 Mosfet and the modem transformer to self-oscillate with the sine wave. Good work!
GB
One shot from the signal generator will re-start the circuit and cause it to self-oscillate again. This is truly amazing. A "perfectly" tuned circuit would produce a continuous sine wave and oscillate indefinitely. I believe this is what I'm seeing. Please correct me if I'm over-looking something.
GB
Yes gravityblock, you are seeing a circuit that creates its own resonant frequency oscillation ;)
It's not perfect! but it works. I think this maybe one more step in the right direction.
Now!... we need to better understand how to tune for maximum output with minimum input.
So it still needs lots of work to go OU if possible ;D
Stay tuned for more tuning
Luc
Hi Luc,
Interesting effect (but you make way to big steps as far as me concerned haha).
Why, does the circuit self resonance, and why do you need to 'trigger' it once to get going?
Well, see it as a normal L-C circuit, only now the C is made out of the [combination] of Ciss/Coss/Crss(voltage depended) and the small 2nf cap you placed parallel to the coil.
Why do you need to 'trigger' it, to get it going?
Because in initial stage, there is *no* voltage applied to the mosfet, so hence the system can't operate... Once you give it a 'one time shot' with the generator (could be battery also), you start the reaction....
The Bemf from the toroid coil provides the energy to get power the gate again.
Small calculation... your precision meter showed 0.000088 Amp (88uA).
What goes into the mosfet: 10.94 volt RMS (from the coil) which has a 6.9 ohm resistance...
So, 10.94 Volt / 6.9 Ohm = 1.5855 Amp.. Divide this through the Frequency 18120 Hz... 1,5855072463768115942028985507246 / 18120 = 0.0000875 A (87.5uA) which is pretty well what your precision meter shows also.
while your pick-up coil (with 1K resistor) delivers 0.00054A (540ua), the draw it takes from the circuit is only 0.000034A (34uA), that is a nice effect I would say.
It might get *really* interesting if you can get the 0.000088 down to -0.000001 at least :)
EDIT: Luc, if you measure the mH of the coil, you would be able to derive the C provided by the mosfet, since you have placed a 2nf in parallel with it... at 18.12Khz and 2nf you are at 38.57mH.
EDIT2: Yes, you can bring down the 0.000088 still, with changing the small 2nf cap, though *how* far down
will you be able to go? Did you read my info, on how you probably get *best possible* tuning ?
Your circuit is using 0.95mW at this stage [without pick-up coil]. Errr... That would be 1.13mW actually
The total circuit uses 1.13mW, the coil uses 0.95mW, so 1.13-0.95=0.18mW for the operating of the Mosfet (it's switching),
and it's resistance.
EDIT3: Luc, what is the resistance of your pick-up coil? Wonder if it is close to 10.85 or 14.01 Ohm?
--
NextGen67
Quote from: gravityblock on March 26, 2010, 12:48:07 AM
One shot from the signal generator will re-start the circuit and cause it to self-oscillate again. This is truly amazing. A "perfectly" tuned circuit would produce a continuous sine wave and oscillate indefinitely. I believe this is what I'm seeing. Please correct me if I'm over-looking something.
GB
Still some 0.000088 from that.... Once it get to -0.000001 it is self sustaining (e.g. no battery necessary) and able to give energy back.
--
NextGen67
luc great job at looping the signal.
Well not quite OU but not far off. 1.57mw in , .29mw out
What Im not sure of how the modem transformer is doing it by being across the source and gate. That would indicate that either the source is showing a variation to apply signal to the gate, or the gate is feeding back through the gate against the source and bouncing back to the gate through the modem transformer. Like a small delay.
Not really sure, but it is as I have talked about getting some feedback to run itself. Depending on the gate sig voltage as you have it now, I would try using the pu coil to apply sig to the gate. If that lil modem transformer is not shorted on the one end and instead, connected to the pu coil, phased one way or the other, you may be able to drive the gate higher.
Mags
Quote from: NextGen67 on March 26, 2010, 04:32:23 AM
Hi Luc,
Interesting effect (but you make way to big steps as far as me concerned haha).
Why, does the circuit self resonance, and why do you need to 'trigger' it once to get going?
Well, see it as a normal L-C circuit, only now the C is made out of the [combination] of Ciss/Coss/Crss(voltage depended) and the small 2nf cap you placed parallel to the coil.
Why do you need to 'trigger' it, to get it going?
Because in initial stage, there is *no* voltage applied to the mosfet, so hence the system can't operate... Once you give it a 'one time shot' with the generator (could be battery also), you start the reaction....
The Bemf from the toroid coil provides the energy to get power the gate again.
Small calculation... your precision meter showed 0.000088 Amp (88uA).
What goes into the mosfet: 10.94 volt RMS (from the coil) which has a 6.9 ohm resistance...
So, 10.94 Volt / 6.9 Ohm = 1.5855 Amp.. Divide this through the Frequency 18120 Hz... 1,5855072463768115942028985507246 / 18120 = 0.0000875 A (87.5uA) which is pretty well what your precision meter shows also.
while your pick-up coil (with 1K resistor) delivers 0.00054A (540ua), the draw it takes from the circuit is only 0.000034A (34uA), that is a nice effect I would say.
It might get *really* interesting if you can get the 0.000088 down to -0.000001 at least :)
EDIT: Luc, if you measure the mH of the coil, you would be able to derive the C provided by the mosfet, since you have placed a 2nf in parallel with it... at 18.12Khz and 2nf you are at 38.57mH.
EDIT2: Yes, you can bring down the 0.000088 still, with changing the small 2nf cap, though *how* far down
will you be able to go? Did you read my info, on how you probably get *best possible* tuning ?
Your circuit is using 0.95mW at this stage [without pick-up coil]. Errr... That would be 1.13mW actually
The total circuit uses 1.13mW, the coil uses 0.95mW, so 1.13-0.95=0.18mW for the operating of the Mosfet (it's switching),
and it's resistance.
EDIT3: Luc, what is the resistance of your pick-up coil? Wonder if it is close to 10.85 or 14.01 Ohm?
--
NextGen67
Hi NextGen67,
thanks for your above details and also the new test details you asked for which I will do this weekend.
First, the toroids inductance in test 13 is 25.3mH and the pickup coil is 28mH and 24.8 Ohm DC resistance.
I tried to add more capacitance to the 2nf tuning capacitor to further drop the current draw to which results in frequency drop but it looks like it's at its maximum since adding more the circuit stops to self oscillate :P
I also found that I can have the pickup coil further 2" or 5cm and I can pickup the resonance effect If I inset and tune a ferrite in the pickup coil. I also moved it around the toroid with the ferrite inside and there maybe a point close to the magnet that the pickup coil give a good output without current increasing on the toroid. I did this by hand so this still needs to be confirmed with a fixed setup.
I will build a setup that I can adjust the distance between the magnets and toroid to better test all the effects in order to find idea settings.
Luc
Quote from: Magluvin on March 26, 2010, 05:12:43 AM
luc great job at looping the signal.
Well not quite OU but not far off. 1.57mw in , .29mw out
What Im not sure of how the modem transformer is doing it by being across the source and gate. That would indicate that either the source is showing a variation to apply signal to the gate, or the gate is feeding back through the gate against the source and bouncing back to the gate through the modem transformer. Like a small delay.
Not really sure, but it is as I have talked about getting some feedback to run itself. Depending on the gate sig voltage as you have it now, I would try using the pu coil to apply sig to the gate. If that lil modem transformer is not shorted on the one end and instead, connected to the pu coil, phased one way or the other, you may be able to drive the gate higher.
Mags
Hi Mags,
it is interesting to see it working this way ;D
If I remove the short on the unused side of the modem transformer the self oscillation stops.
Luc
Hi Luc,
Would you measure the inductance of the small 1:1 transformator that is connected to the gate-source?
You mentioned in the latest video the other side of the transformator is short circuited with that piece of wire. This bothers me if really so because it greatly reduces the inductance of the other coil. You could test it too with the L meter: measure on one side, the other side is open, then short this latter other side, and read the L meter.
Thanks, Gyula
Hey luc
Yes I got that about the short on the opposing side of the modem transformer. =]
But what I was thinking was if you replaced the short with the pu coil instead, it might drive the gate a bit more, and then the output a bit more and then the gate a bit more... lol tiny Chernobyl. =] But just heat, no RA
Mags
Ah but maybe even better to just hook up the pu coil to the gate and source? Maybe.
Just quick simple stuff to try.
Mags
Quote from: gyulasun on March 26, 2010, 10:22:48 AM
Hi Luc,
Would you measure the inductance of the small 1:1 transformator that is connected to the gate-source?
You mentioned in the latest video the other side of the transformator is short circuited with that piece of wire. This bothers me if really so because it greatly reduces the inductance of the other coil. You could test it too with the L meter: measure on one side, the other side is open, then short this latter other side, and read the L meter.
Thanks, Gyula
Yes, you're right!... glad you are all here helping.
The inductance when not shorted is higher then my meter can measure (20H)
When shorted it's 10mH
I'll add a 5K pot on the normally shorted side of the modem transformer and vary it to see the effect on the self oscillation in hope to find the ideal inductance. I'll then match it with a coil of that value and see if it still works.
Thanks for bringing this to my attention :)
Luc
Quote from: gotoluc on March 26, 2010, 10:11:50 AM
Hi NextGen67,
thanks for your above details and also the new test details you asked for which I will do this weekend.
First, the toroids inductance in test 13 is 25.3mH and the pickup coil is 28mH and 24.8 Ohm DC resistance.
I tried to add more capacitance to the 2nf tuning capacitor to further drop the current draw to which results in frequency drop but it looks like it's at its maximum since adding more the circuit stops to self oscillate :P
I also found that I can have the pickup coil further 2" or 5cm and I can pickup the resonance effect If I inset and tune a ferrite in the pickup coil. I also moved it around the toroid with the ferrite inside and there maybe a point close to the magnet that the pickup coil give a good output without current increasing on the toroid. I did this by hand so this still needs to be confirmed with a fixed setup.
I will build a setup that I can adjust the distance between the magnets and toroid to better test all the effects in order to find idea settings.
Luc
Ha, that explains my numbers 10.85 or 14.01 [10.85+14.01 = 24.86 !]...
About the resistance of your pickup coil. Good that I could predict it.
The toroid inductance of 25.3 mH... I guess then the C's of the mosfet were
3049pF - 2000pF (2nF) = 1049 Pf.... Which indicates that probably your mosfet is hardly
switching on... That would then be also why the mosfet shuts off when adding more Capacitance.
Yeah, when you have the build done, you will be able to have more control.
--
NextGen67
Quote from: gotoluc on March 26, 2010, 10:38:59 AM
Yes, you're right!... A you are all here helping.
The inductance when not shorted is higher then my meter can measure (20H)
When shorted it's 10mH
I'll add a 5K pot on the normally shorted side of the modem transformer and vary it to see the effect on the self oscillation in hope to find the ideal inductance. I'll then match it with a coil of that value and see if it still works.
A for bringing this to my attention :)
Luc
Luc, the 5K pot is also good but maybe you could test the inductance change with a separate magnet attached to very near the core of the modem transformer, just like at the toroidal core. Good thing is you can use the L meter for both tests separately and see the effect.
Gyula
Quote from: NextGen67 link=topic=8892.msg234686#msg234686 A=1269614426
... I guess then the C's of the mosfet were
3049pF - 2000pF (2nF) = 1049 Pf.... Which indicates that probably your mosfet is hardly
switching on...
It cannot be that the 2SK MOSFET is not switching on, you may wish to consider it switches on for every positive half wave and off for the negative ones. So the drain source capacitance must be some switched average value... with a value you calculated.
Gyula
@gotoluc;
(1)
Excellent and innovative solutions. I am glad we got that out of the way as
I am convinced we were seeing groundloop problems, with no apologies to
the user with that screenname. ::) So it would be best to keep the signal
generator ground disconnected…We have a very sensitive analog energy
balance. And a groundloop can pump energy into the circuit derived from
the utility lines! There may be a small metal shunt on the back of the signal
generator that can be opened (for a quick AB test) the isolates power line
ground from the signal ground in the SigGen. I wouldn’t run The SigGen with
that shunt opened forever. Alternatively you can one of those small grey
plastic 2 prong plug to 3 prong outlet converters with the little green
ground pigtail left open, to do the same thing. These things are power line
ground isolation techniques.
(2)
What you may want to do is to totally stop now and re-design an oscillator
circuit patterned on the JT Joule Thief circuit with the official toroid coil
totally removed from the circuit. This would use an audio transformer *in
place of a JT toroid*. (a one to one transformer is often not a best choice
for use in an oscillator though). Once the (power) oscillator circuit was
working *then* remove a load resistor and insert the official large toroid
Drain to Vcc. Your circuit will then be self starting with frequency
determined by a cap across the transformer. I can tell this 1:1 transformer
is trying to pull the circuit frequency down to its self resonance design
frequency of 18KHz which isn’t that good. You could also wind a small JT
osc. toroid transformer for this app. I’d stick with mosfet transistors.
Alternatively the transistor in the drive oscillator could be replaced by a
small signal mosfet and use that output of that => to drive main mosfet +
coil. Either way would be a more operationally stable situation.
(3)
I think you can boost the efficiency of the pickup coil by making one like
the J. Naudin’s coil (one with the leds) around the magnet stack. That
alone may do it in terms of ou.
(4)
Use a capacitive voltage multiplier to charge the bulk capacitor from pickup
coil energy. The circuit as from a disposable flash camera driven by a three
volt battery comes to mind. This could use the main oscillator frequency to
switch a small signal mosfet to pump a capacitor and diode linked backed to
the main capacitor. Be real with this information;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voltage_multiplier
PS: Connect the bridge rectifier, across the pickup coil unless a diode is
blown out, it will boost 59.uf capacitor charging efficiency!
Thanks and good work so far… Now let's get cleanly beyond a unity gain
situation. :)
:S:MarkSCoffman
Hi all,
so now the modem coil is gone ;D
It has been replaced (so far ;)) with a PC board 10mH inductor and a 22K pot adjusted to around 10K
It is working much better this way as much more resistance was needed between the gate and source then the modem transformer had. However the 10mH inductance is needed and maybe more. I will test this.
I'm now able to add more capacitance at the toroid. We are now at .0033uf or 3.3nf and resonating frequency is 12KHz. Current is down to .000070 with 12.88vdc feed.
One more step in the positive direction.
Luc
Quote from: gyulasun on March 26, 2010, 10:56:27 AM
It cannot be that the 2SK MOSFET is not switching on, you may wish to consider it switches on for every positive half wave and off for the negative ones. So the drain source capacitance must be some switched average value... with a value you calculated.
Gyula
Should have made myself more clear.
Meaning: ...Which indicates that probably your mosfet is hardly switching on
when adding Additional capacitance [Certainly when you add a whole nF at once... Resonane will fall out of reach with magnet position, and thus less energy is
returned by the toroid coil, and thus the mosfet cease to operate, and halts the whole circuit].
@Luc... As per new testing method, you probably could keep it in resonance tough, and bring down the uA's ;)
EDIT: and as seen in Luc's above message, when using a more economic way to drive the fet, it makes things better.
--
NextGen67
I decided to try the pot (variable resistor) in series with the inductor instead of both inductor and 10K in parallel between the gate and source. It works this way but I only need a total resistance of 445 Ohms. 27 Ohms from the inductor and the balance from the variable resistor. However at the best setting it uses .000080
So for some reason the other way is better.
Luc
Quote from: gotoluc on March 26, 2010, 12:09:10 PM
It has been replaced (so far ;)) with a PC board 10mH inductor and a 22K pot adjusted to around 10K
It is working much better this way as much more resistance was needed between the gate and source then the modem transformer had. However the 10mH inductance is needed and maybe more. I will test this.
I'm now able to add more capacitance at the toroid. We are now at .0033uf or 3.3nf and resonating frequency is 12KHz. Current is down to .000070 with 12.88vdc feed.
Just so you know...I think you are creating a: Phase Shift Oscillator. I predict
you are going to get all of your parameters tied up in one big ball in a moment.
Quote from: gotoluc on March 26, 2010, 12:09:10 PM
Hi all,
so now the modem coil is gone ;D
<...> We are now at .0033uf or 3.3nf and resonating frequency is 12KHz. Current is down to .000070 with 12.88vdc feed.
One more step in the positive direction.
Luc
Luc, What is your CH1 RMS now... Guess a lot lower? (maybe somewhere around 5.8V ?)
--
NextGen67
Here is the scope shot with probe between base and source to see what the gate pulses look like.
When I disconnected the probe between the drain and source the current drop some more.
Now at this frequency it uses .000049
Luc
Here is a scope shot of both... channel 1 between drain & source and channel 2 between gate and source.
I also switched the probes and software to X10 and now it hardly affects the current this way.
Luc
Quote from: NextGen67 on March 26, 2010, 01:11:44 PM
Luc, What is your CH1 RMS now... Guess a lot lower? (maybe somewhere around 5.8V ?)
--
NextGen67
See scope shot above ::)... it's at 8.59v RMS
Luc
Quote from: gotoluc on March 26, 2010, 01:31:50 PM
See scope shot above ::)... it's at 8.59v RMS
Luc
Geat :) Still can go a little bit down, then you will probably hit the threshold of the mosfet. Tough possible can solve it again with magnet position ;)
End for today. Late again.
--
NextGen67
Quote from: gotoluc on March 26, 2010, 01:31:50 PM
See scope shot above ::)... it's at 8.59v RMS
Luc
@gotoluc
I like this composite waveform...it's nice and placid. The toroid coil
is constant running at resonant pure sinewave f and is pumped by the
gate at resonating 2f damped at 50% oscillation.
It might be interesting to try to boost the gate to 4f.
:S:MarkSCoffman
Quote from: mscoffman on March 26, 2010, 04:36:15 PM
@gotoluc
I like this composite waveform...it's nice and placid. The toroid coil
is constant running at resonant pure sinewave f and is pumped by the
gate at resonating 2f damped at 50% oscillation.
It might be interesting to try to boost the gate to 4f.
:S:MarkSCoffman
Hi Mark,
I have no schooling in electronics or even regular school for that matter. What I know at this time was learned by trial and error. So unfortunately I don't know what the term 2f and 4f means.
If you care to explain more I may get it ::)... or not ;D
Thanks
Luc
2F and 4F refer to harmonics of the main frequency. For example, the 2F harmonic of 60Hz is 120Hz, and the 4F harmonic would be 240Hz. Square waves, or other non sinusoidal waves, can be considered to be the sum of a fundamental frequency plus harmonics. Spectrum analyzers give you this kind of view, breaking up a complex wave into it's component frequencies.
Quote from: derricka on March 26, 2010, 05:39:26 PM
2F and 4F refer to harmonics of the main frequency. For example, the 2F harmonic of 60Hz is 120Hz, and the 4F harmonic would be 240Hz. Square waves, or other non sinusoidal waves, can be considered to be the sum of a fundamental frequency plus harmonics. Spectrum analyzers give you this kind of view, breaking up a complex wave into it's component frequencies.
Thanks derricka for taking the time to explain what that term means.
Luc
Quote from: mscoffman on March 26, 2010, 04:36:15 PM
@gotoluc
I like this composite waveform...it's nice and placid. The toroid coil
is constant running at resonant pure sinewave f and is pumped by the
gate at resonating 2f damped at 50% oscillation.
It might be interesting to try to boost the gate to 4f.
:S:MarkSCoffman
Does this have anything to do with parametric resonance? If not, then could parametric resonance be beneficial to this system.
Parametric resonance occurs in a system when a it is parametrically excited and oscillates at one of its resonant frequencies. Parametric resonance takes place when the external excitation frequency equals to twice the natural frequency of the system. Parametric excitation differs from forcing since the action appears as a time varying modification on a system parameter.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parametric_resonanceThanks,
GB
YES YES YES Parametric resonance !
When we combine it with some kinds of amplifiers we will have OU.
Quote from: gravityblock on March 27, 2010, 05:42:09 AM
Does this have anything to do with parametric resonance? If not, then could parametric resonance be beneficial to this system.
Parametric resonance occurs in a system when a it is parametrically excited and oscillates at one of its resonant frequencies. Parametric resonance takes place when the external excitation frequency equals to twice the natural frequency of the system. Parametric excitation differs from forcing since the action appears as a time varying modification on a system parameter.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parametric_resonance
Thanks,
GB
@gravityblock;
There may be some of that going on. Parameteric oscillation are
when some of the component values parmeters shift. For example
the change of mosfet gate or drain-source capacitance with voltage.
It is not just 1f, 2f harmonic systems that can engage in parameteric
oscillation. As pointed out in wiki; Varicap diodes intentionally can
do this change (use spec sheets, if you think this is desired). It looks
like toroid coils themselves would engage in this as the coil magnetic
field strength increses, their inductance would change.
I was pointing out that I didn't think it would be easy to
find changes in component values that would reduce the
current below 49ua easily because other then the mosfet
(a) all the signals are already sinewaves -with no energy
invested in higher frequencies and (b) the two different
frequencies are harmonically related like a musical
instrument.
:S:MarkSCoffman
FWII've copied this from the energetic forum so you can be updated as to what point I am at this time.
Luc
Quote from: cody;90124Hi luc,
First off, genious resonator! Thanks for trying the cap. Ive run some math to help maybe. Im not sure what your inductance in the last test is but im assuming its 200mH. If thats the case than with the 0.002uf capacitor, the resonant frequancy of the coil should be 7957 Hz. I find it odd that the calculated frequency of your coil is so far off from the frequency that you have been using :thinking: I wonder if the coils special winding plays a role in that. Either way this may suggest that the tuning can get better. You should be able to tune the frequency by putting a potentiometer in series with your oscilating inductor or using a magnet to tune that core. But i might be wrong, its such a new oscilator, im still trying to wrap my brain around it. I have figured out where some of your losses have come from by adding the capacitor. In the tank circuit you now have introduced a circulating current, this current is much larger than the current you are putting into the tank. We can use ohms law to determin the current.
V=10.94V rms
R=6.7 ohms (coil resistance)
I=V/R
I=10.94/6.7
I=1.63 amps
Your at a low enough frequency that we dont have to worry about skin effect but your 30 awg wire is not capable of pushing 1.63A. Maximum amps for power transmission of 30 awg is 0.142A. So your wasting energy in heat. We can easily correct that be changing the value of the voltage. We can use ohms law again to calculate the maximum voltage you can use in that particular setup.
I=0.142A
R=6.7(coil resistance)
V=IR
V=0.142(6.7)
V=0.95 volts
If you take a temperature reading of your current setup running off 12V you should find that the coil is heating up, and dont forget the capacitor too. It must be able to withstand the amperage as well. If it heats up you can use multiple caps in parallel of lesser value to add up to the desired capacitance and give a higher amp capability. And all wires between coil and cap must be able to handle the power as well. So if you are pushing your toroid over 0.95 volts, than you are wasting energy in heat. Please correct me if i have something wrong here.
Hi Cody.
thanks for your interest and help also :)
The inductance of the toroid coil (with magnets and air gap) in test 13 video is around 26mH + - 1mH
As for the oscillation inductor connected between gate and source. After a full day of playing with this, it seems there is no need for a resistor and the resistance of the inductor does not seem to matter. It's all about
Inductance At this time I'm playing with the circuit and will give you the details of the toroid coils. I say coils because I wound a quick one layer toroid as the mosfet pulse inductor.
The mosfet is a 2SK2806-01
Battery voltage is 12.88vdc
Main Toroid is 6.95 Ohms DC
Its Inductance is 117mH (with magnets)
Pulse Toroid is 0.097 Ohms DC
Its Inductance is 19mH
So using the 2SK2806-01 mosfet which needs min. 2v to trigger the above Pulse inductor specs will do it as long as the input voltage is 12.88vdc and the the main pulse coil inductance is 117mH. The result of this combination will be a sine wave Resonance at 14KHz.
Lower the main coil inductance and you will need to also lower the pulse inductor and the result will be a higher Resonance frequency.
Maybe a formula could be established that one could just input mosfet minimum gate trigger voltage, main coil inductance and source voltage, then it would give you the pulse coil inductance needed and also tell you the resonating frequency. I think this would be possible.
There is no need for the pulse inductor coil to be a toroid. I used one to see if I can find any advantages and see if less resistance used less power. So far I can't see any advantages.
Cody, can you please look this over and recommend the best voltage and frequency I should be using and I could re-tune to see if I can find any advantages. So far the lowest I could get the current down just before the circuit stops pulsing because of not enough pulse voltage produced (at gate) is 30uA @ 12.88vdc. The frequency range I tested is 30KHz down to 14KHz and all are about the same 30uA results.
Thanks for your help and time.
Luc
ADDEDLink to MOSFET pdf: http://www.skory.gylcomp.hu/alkatresz/2sk2806.pdf
Quote from: gyulasun on March 24, 2010, 05:08:16 PM
Hi Rob,
Re on common mode choke: you are correct the winding technique Luc used for his toroidal coils is really the one as the so called common mode chokes are made BUT the big difference is the way how they are connected: Luc connected the two coils in series aiding i.e. the MUTUAL inductances of the two coils add to the sum of the individual inductances in series, so that the resultant inductance is nearly the 4 times of a single coil, Lresultant=(L1+L2+2M where L1=L2=L in the equation (the two coils are assumed to have the same inductance which is nearly true and M is nearly L because in ring cores the coefficience of coupling is nearly 1 ). (A useful link on this is here: http://www.daycounter.com/LabBook/Mutual-Inductance.phtml )
I hope this helps clarify your doubt above.
rgds, Gyula
Hi Gyula,
I have some questions about this toroid winding and connection technique I found and originally used this same toroid on my ORBO replication. BTW, this toroid coil gave me the best results on the ORBO. More Inductance with less windings = Less Resistance and more winding space for extra layers.
Here are my questions:
1. wouldn't using a toroid and this winding technique not have a benefit in a electric motor?
2. does more Inductance not give a stronger magnetic field?
3. does more Inductance cost more energy than a lower Inductance coil?
Always grateful for your help :)
Luc
Quote from: gotoluc on March 27, 2010, 06:50:16 PM
Hi Gyula,
I have some questions about this toroid winding and connection technique I found and originally used this same toroid on my ORBO replication. BTW, this toroid coil gave me the best results on the ORBO. More Inductance with less windings = Less Resistance and more winding space for extra layers.
Here are my questions:
1. wouldn't using a toroid and this winding technique not have a benefit in a electric motor?
2. does more Inductance not give a stronger magnetic field?
3. does more Inductance cost more energy than a lower Inductance coil?
Always grateful for your help :)
Luc
Hi Luc,
1) it depends what you mean on electric motor, sorry. in conventional motors a toroid with its closed magnetic path is normally not considered but if an inventor finds ways for applying it in a novel way: in ORBO the toroidal coil is used for 'shielding' the core from a magnet by way of saturation, as so far it is found
2) yes, more inductance gives a stronger magnetic field
3) it is a complex question, I do not know a strait yes or no but maybe it does. The time constant L/R increases for sure, this means higher inductive impedance to resist current and if you want a quicker current response you have to increase input voltage to force higher current --> this involves higher input power.
MAybe other members here could comment some more on these.
rgds, Gyula
Quote from: gyulasun on March 27, 2010, 07:34:06 PM
Hi Luc,
1) it depends what you mean on electric motor, sorry. in conventional motors a toroid with its closed magnetic path is normally not considered but if an inventor finds ways for applying it in a novel way: in ORBO the toroidal coil is used for 'shielding' the core from a magnet by way of saturation, as so far it is found
2) yes, more inductance gives a stronger magnetic field
3) it is a complex question, I do not know a strait yes or no but maybe it does. The time constant L/R increases for sure, this means higher inductive impedance to resist current and if you want a quicker current response you have to increase input voltage to force higher current --> this involves higher input power.
MAybe other members here could comment some more on these.
rgds, Gyula
Thanks Gyula for the quick reply.
Yes, the ORBO is a motor design that can use a toroid and I have other ideas how a motor could use a toroid but I need to know about the questions I asked to see if there is an advantage.
So you say yes to more inductance = a more powerful magnet field.
But you say more inductance may cost more energy. Is this because it usually takes more windings to get more inductance which = more wire resistance which = loss of energy?
Thanks for your help
Luc
Hi everyone,
I made a new video to seek more answers for those who know the answers to all these things ;D
Link to video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=obFj9x1u4lA
Please post your "educated" explanations as to why 2 coils of the same inductance behave in such a different way.
Thanks for your time
Luc
One coil with core and one without core ? ;D
Quote from: gotoluc on March 27, 2010, 10:40:30 PM
Hi everyone,
I made a new video to seek more answers for those who know the answers to all these things ;D
Link to video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=obFj9x1u4lA
Please post your "educated" explanations as to why 2 coils of the same inductance behave in such a different way.
Thanks for your time
Luc
My best "uneducated" guess, is it has to do with impedance. Impedance is the combination of inductive reactance (X
L), capacitive reactance (X
C), and resistance (R).
The impedance curve does not reach zero at its minimum point. The vectors above and below resonance show that the phase shift of the circuit at these frequencies is less than 90 degrees because of the resistance.
GB
gotoluc ;D posted once upon a time this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_3OkDvmp_Y&feature=related
another tip : look at the scope shots , they seems not identical ,right ?
"I recognized that it was of tremendous advantage to break at the peak of the wave. If I used just an ordinary break, it would make and break the current at low as well as high points of the wave. Of this apparatus I had two forms; one in which I drove the break right from the shaft of the dynamo and the other in which I drove it with an isochronous motor. Then, by a movement of these knobs (K K), I would make the adjustments so that the makes would occur exactly at the top of the wave. That is a form of break which is embodied in hundreds of patents and used now extensively." Nikola Tesla
http://www.tfcbooks.com/tesla/nt_on_ac.htm#Section_4
So are we assuming that the magnet on the toroid only changes the inductance and has no other values compared to the big coil? this seems like we are going backwards.
Mags
Quote from: forest on March 28, 2010, 06:44:28 AM
gotoluc ;D posted once upon a time this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_3OkDvmp_Y&feature=related
Great Stuff, Luc!
GB
Quote from: Magluvin on March 28, 2010, 06:50:36 AM
So are we assuming that the magnet on the toroid only changes the inductance and has no other values compared to the big coil? this seems like we are going backwards.
Mags
I think Luc's latest experiment shows the magnet on the toroid is doing more than just changing the inductance. JLN's experiment on hystersis, shows the magnet on the toroid also decreases the hysteresis losses in a ferromagnetic core,
http://jnaudin.free.fr/2SGen/indexen.htm#hysteresis This is why I posted a publication a few days ago about certain ferromagnetic materials that have a near 0 residual magnetization, a near 0 coercive force, and a near 0 hysteresis loss (it only received a few downloads, lol). These materials return back to a near "virginal state". I will post a link to it again,
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=downloads;sa=downfile&id=381 So, the magnet on the toroid, the core itself, and the windings are important.
GB
Quote from: gravityblock on March 28, 2010, 07:05:40 AM
This is why I posted a publication a few days ago about certain ferromagnetic materials that have a near 0 residual magnetization, a near 0 coercive force, and a near 0 hysteresis loss (it only received a few downloads, lol). These materials with a magnet on them, will always return the ferromagnetic material back to a near "virginal state". I will post a link to it again, http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=downloads;sa=downfile&id=381
So, the magnet on the toroid, the core itself, and the windings are important.
GB
Can't get the link to work
It should be a fairly simple hypothesis to test, however, by direct comparison.
Quote from: happyfunball on March 28, 2010, 07:32:31 AM
Can't get the link to work
It should be a fairly simple hypothesis to test, however, by direct comparison.
You're not the first person who says the link doesn't work, but the link does work for me though.
The publication can also be viewed or downloaded on Scribd (the ferromagnetic materials that return to a near virginal state are mentioned on the 12th page),
http://www.scribd.com/doc/28789552/SURVEY-CHARACTERISTICS-AND-EVALUATION-OF-HIGH-PERFORMANCE-MAGNETIC-CORE-MATERIALSGB
QuoteYour not the first person who says the link doesn't work
My MSN explorer doesn't bring it up. Firefox,Netscape and Opera do. I havent put Googles chrome on. I havent used the MS browser since its inception for a few reasons. Id stay far away from it as possible.
Quote from: gotoluc on March 27, 2010, 08:02:52 PM
...
But you say more inductance may cost more energy. Is this because it usually takes more windings to get more inductance which = more wire resistance which = loss of energy?
...
Hi Luc,
No, because normally if you double the number of turns, the R copper resistance also doubles (linear relationship) but the coil's L inductance quadruples (quadratic relationship in the number of turns in the L formula).
This means the L/R time constant eventually increases too (because its nominator grows faster than its denominator).
I think this is the answer to your findings in your latest video with the big air core coil of the same inductance like the toroidal one.
Consider the followings:
Battery voltage V=12V
toroidal coil R
t=7 Ohm Air core coil R
a=5 Ohm
L=.1135H L=.1135H
See the formula for calculating the current at any moment in an inductance here:
http://www.ac.wwu.edu/~vawter/PhysicsNet/Topics/Inductance/LRCircuits.html (http://www.ac.wwu.edu/%7Evawter/PhysicsNet/Topics/Inductance/LRCircuits.html)
I
max is the maximum current that can flow in a series R-L circuit connected to a voltage source, comes from Ohms law when at least 5 times the L/R time already passed from the switch ON time.
This max current is different for the above two coils (12/7=1.714A and 12/5=2.4A).
The L/R time constant is 16.21 ms for the toroidal and 22.7 ms for the air core coil.
Now if you use the formula from the above link for getting the instantenous current first in the toroidal coil then in the air core coil, say, 10 millisecond after you switch the 12V onto them, you get the followings:
current in the toroidal coil i
t=1.714(1-e
-10/16.21)= .789A
and current in the air core coil i
a=2.4(1-e
-10/22.7)= .855A
So we got higher current in the air core coil under the same circumstances, the only difference is the 2 Ohm copper resistance between the two coils.
In fact there is another difference between the two coils: the iron core of the toroidal coil is surely biased by a magnet so it may behave nonlinearly, due to the nonlinear behavior of its permeabilty in the function of the coil current, the air core coil is 'linear' in this respect
So the need for the higher input drive to the air core is due to its less copper resistance, when you compare it to the more lossy toroidal core, sounds as a strange result indeed.
rgds, Gyula
EDIT: It would come from the above that if you reduce the supply voltage from 12.7 to about 8.57V (1.714A*5 Ohm)then the current in the air core coil would be about the same 1.714A like in the toroidal coil with the 12.7V supply (this Amper value is meant after the 5*L/R time of course). BUT the MOSFET would have a higher input and output interelectrode capacitances at the reduced drain source voltage you may have to compensate with a slight retuning of the input frequency, and try using the same drive level as in the 12.7V toroidal core case.
The reason that these two coils is different is exactly the reason one uses
a ferrite to increase the inductance of a coil. Just so we understand each
other the brookes coil is a standard coil - is that correct? That is it doesn't have
any attributes that would cancel part of it's inductance by backward winding.
Some OU type coils have partial backward winding. A wire wound resistor cancels
it's parasitic inductance by winding half in one direction flipping in the middle
and the other half in the other direction.
The large gauge wire coil has tremendous interwinding self capacitance.
This capacitance is called distributed rather then the lump capacitance
of a capacitor. Each winding has a small value of capacitance relative
to the next turn and the first winding has some capacitance to the last.
How the coil is wound will determine how the capacitance is distributed.
The whole point of the inductive core is to increases the inductance without
increasing the interwinding capacitance so the toroid has much less
interwinding capacitance. Because of the way this works each segment of
the large coil is filtering RF. And so a ferrite is used to increase the inductance
of an RF coil. 10Khz is apparently RF for the big coil. These things effect the
Q of the reasonace at a certain frequencies. The Q of the coil for our purposes
is the ratio of the pp signal across the toroid to the bulk driving power...
You will note that the toroid we are using is picking up some good Q at a ratio of
about 2.5/(1).; at 30Khz...This is good. The big coil is displaying a Q of very much
less than 1. Now put a large cap on that big coil and excite it at hundreds of times
less frequency and I suspect it will show a reasonable Q also. f=1/(2pi * sqrt(LC))
Your inductance meter operates at probably one frequency and this may make it
susceptible to misreading the inductance. You may want to carefully attach your
scope on the inductance meter to see what it is doing. A frequency agile series
of signals would indicate a more sophisticated measurement technique. I'll bet it's
using one sinewave frequency and the low Q of the big coil may be causing it grief.
The following link contains a document that shows how to measure the
distributed capacitance of a toroid and would work for the big coil as well.
Several pf's of distributed capacitance of the toroid are not going to hold
a candle to 1100pf of the transistor gate. The capacitance of the toroid
is also low because the intermediate windings splay out at all angles relative
to one another. That is not optimal for forming self capacitance.
http://g3ynh.info/zdocs/magnetics/appendix/Toroid_selfC.html
:S:MarkSCoffman
Quote from: Lazaris2005 on March 21, 2010, 04:49:09 PM
Great !
To me, it makes perfect sense.
And it opens a good field for optimizations, i think, regarding the spacer's material.
In my imagination, It would require a material with a good shape memory and superelasticity.
As an orthodontist, i instantly thought of nickel-titanium (Ni-Ti), or nitinol alloys.
http://herkules.oulu.fi/isbn9514252217/html/x317.html
As far as i know, but not entirely sure, this alloy is non ferro magnetic.
It would not be expensive or hard to make spacers with a small acrylic disc holding 4 or more small 0.012 wires as "legs", providing an spring effect.
The choice of material could provide better amplitude on magnets micro movements, optimizing it's work.
Just my 2 cents.
Hope it sounds not too much stupid :)
Men, please keep this great work.
Thanks.
Look at this new alloy.
http://blogs.physicstoday.org/update/2010/03/stretchy-metals-recoil.html
In materials, as the axiom goes, structure follows function: A metal’s tightly bonded atomic crystal lattice gives it strength, and a polymer’s mesh of macromolecular chains makes it elastic. Medical implants, electronic components, and other similar devices call for multifunctional materials that are both strong and stretchy. One such material is the shape-memory alloy (SMA), a polycrystalline arrangement of assorted metals that, when stressed, undergoes a structural phase transition from high to low symmetry. The transition is reversible, and above a critical temperature SMAs are superelasticâ€"they fully recover after being stretched well beyond the reversible-deformation strain values of pure metals. Now, materials scientists at Tohoku University in Sendai, Japan, have presented evidence for an iron-based SMA that is 35 times as elastic as pure metals. The new alloy, which also features nickel, cobalt, aluminum, tantalum, and boron, has an elastic strain of 13%, as shown in the figure, almost double the value of the more expensive commercial-standard nickelâ€"titanium alloy. Furthermore, the material’s yield strength, 800 MPa, is 1.5 times that of the nickelâ€"titanium SMA. The researchers say that microstructured precipitates similar in composition to the bulk matrix and interspersed through it are a key to the improved mechanical strength. The greater elastic strain and strength could be exploited for mechanical damping in building materials. Also, the ferrous SMA’s magnetism is phase dependent, which makes it potentially useful for electromechanical sensing applications. (Y. Tanaka et al., Science 327, 1488, 2010.)â€"Jermey N. A. Matthews
Hi Luc,
One more thing for you: if you have a 2 Ohm resistor, you could connect it in series with the air core coil, this way its loss would 'seem' to be the same as that of the toroidal one, so the current would also be similar from working the 12V battery in the same way. IT would be worth for a quick test too, then no need to use a 8.5-9V supply voltage.
Gyula
Hi all,
thanks for all your input as to why the differences between the 2 coils. I will make another video when I have time that will have a coil of exact resistance and inductance and we can continue from there.
Here is an update on the self pulsing coil at this time.
Using a IRF640 it is self pulsing at 20KHz with 3vdc input at 14uA + or - 0.5uA
Channel 1 (green) is across the drain and source and Channel 2 (yellow) is across the gate and source. Both probe grounds are connected to source.
Take note of the beautiful Sine Wave the pulse coil is now making to trigger the mosfet gate. I think this is a new and ideal way of triggering a MOSFET.
@Gyula, could you please look up the specs of the IRF640 and do a calculation of an approximate wattage needed to keep its gate triggered at 20KHz. If anyone else feels up to the task please feel free to do so.
Thanks all for sharing
Luc
Quote from: gotoluc on March 28, 2010, 06:31:46 PM
Hi all,
thanks for all your input as to why the differences between the 2 coils. I will make another video when I have time that will have a coil of exact resistance and inductance and we can continue from there.
Here is an update on the self pulsing coil at this time.
Using a IRF640 it is self pulsing at 20KHz with 3vdc input at 14uA + or - 0.5uA
Channel 1 (green) is across the drain and source and Channel 2 (yellow) is across the gate and source. Both probe grounds are connected to source.
Take note of the beautiful Sine Wave the pulse coil is now making to trigger the mosfet gate. I think this is a new and ideal way of triggering a MOSFET.
@Gyula, could you please look up the specs of the IRF640 and do a calculation of an approximate wattage needed to keep its gate triggered at 20KHz. If anyone else feels up to the task please feel free to do so.
Thanks all for A.
Luc
Hi Luc,
You can approach input power to the gate-source by considering the charge in the gate source + gate drain interelectrode capacitances first, then using the data sheet for the IRF 640 and this Application guide
http://focus.ti.com/lit/ml/slup169/slup169.pdf
I received about 3.8 mW going into the gate source at 20kHz. (This depends on how I estimate the capacitances of the MOSFET from the data sheet, worst case I got 4.22mW and best case 3.67mW.)
I assume you used the toroidal coil, not the big air core coil, would you measure its inductance as it was when you took the scope shots, just in case later might be useful. Also wonder if you used capacitor in parallel with it?
The pulse coil is at the gate source? and also tuned? maybe with the gate source cap?
One more thing: Does the table contain metal surfaces or is there any metal structure under it where the big air coil was laid? Because such things may ruin the quality factor too much when close by. Also, try to back it up at least 20-30cm in the air, far from anything to see if the circuit parameters change.
rgds, Gyula
Quote from: gyulasun on March 29, 2010, 08:33:59 AM
Hi Luc,
You can approach input power to the gate-source by considering the charge in the gate source + gate drain interelectrode capacitances first, then using the data sheet for the IRF 640 and this Application guide
http://focus.ti.com/lit/ml/slup169/slup169.pdf
I received about 3.8 mW going into the gate source at 20kHz. (This depends on how I estimate the capacitances of the MOSFET from the data sheet, worst case I got 4.22mW and best case 3.67mW.)
I assume you used the toroidal coil, not the big air core coil, would you measure its inductance as it was when you took the scope shots, just in case later might be useful. Also wonder if you used capacitor in parallel with it?
The pulse coil is at the gate source? and also tuned? maybe with the gate source cap?
One more thing: Does the table contain metal surfaces or is there any metal structure under it where the big air coil was laid? Because such things may ruin the quality factor too much when close by. Also, try to back it up at least 20-30cm in the air, far from anything to see if the circuit parameters change.
rgds, Gyula
Hi Gyula,
thanks for taking the time to calculate the approximate wattage the IRF640 would needs to switch the gate at 20KHz
So in my setup of the scope shot above the IRF640 is using no external energy since it's self pulsing by using some of the energy from the coil.
It is doing this at 20KHz with a 3vdc input and using 14uA = 42uW
From your calculations you come up with 3.67mW at best
My question would be now, where does the 3.6mW needed to switch the mosfet come from ???
No capacitors used or needed. Pulse coil is between gate and source. It appears to me that the MOSFET's capacitance maybe what makes this work. I believe (not fact) the other part would be the coil geometry and maybe the magnet.
No, my table has no metal under it. It's made of particle board (wood sawdust). I know for a fact that adding 2 Ohms to the Brooks coil will not make it resonate. If you want to see a video demonstrating this I can do it for you no problem my friend ;)
Luc
@gotoluc
Always good stuff. I don't have the answer to your question but it must have something to do with the greater copper mass of the larger coil. You may have close to the same inductance as the small toroid but the pulse still has to saturate the mass of the bigger one. I don't really know enough about it.
Regarding the magnet on your coil, here is a video that could help explain some of the effect. I put this on Thanes' thread but it has some relation to what you are doing also. Basically, when he adds the magnet to his toroid, you can see on the scope that the pulses go faster probably because the magnet is pre-saturating the core so the impulse wastes less time saturating the core per cycle.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g42hzVKIa0I&feature=channel
@All
What I think I would do is try to duplicate this set-up
with a 2" toroid. But with maybe some secondary windings
to step-up the required gate voltage to 8 volts making
the oscillator self starting. Then try to get both toriod
coils into resonance tuned with magnets rather than
capacitors.
If one could then build an identical set-up using p_channel
mosfets. One could consider doing bipolar coil driving from an
H-bridge final. Diodes would direct the resonating gate voltage
into N-channel circuit or P-channel circuit depending on it's
polarity. The N-channel circuit would drive the coil polarity
one way then the P_channel drive it the other. Clean!
I don't like the idea of open air core coil designs because
powerful oscillating magnetic fields go all over.
:S:MarkSCoffman
Quote from: mscoffman on March 29, 2010, 11:31:19 AM
I don't like the idea of open air core coil designs because
powerful oscillating magnetic fields go all over.
:S:MarkSCoffman
I can't speak for Luc, but I don't think his intent is to use the air coil. What he was trying to demonstrate, is why does the circuit with an air coil and a lower resistance, perform worst than the same circuit with a toroid with a higher resistance, and they both are resonating at the same frequency and have the same inductance. According to the text books, a circuit with a lower resistance should be more efficient than a circuit with a higher resistance when at resonance.....but it's not in Luc's experiment.
GB
@Luc:
I just watched your video #13. Did i understand it correctly that the circuit runs without the function generator connected (only for starting it) and without any other outside connections ?
???
Quote from: gravityblock on March 29, 2010, 01:08:59 PM
I can't speak for Luc, but I don't think his intent is to use the air coil. What he was trying to demonstrate, is why does the circuit with an air coil and a lower resistance, perform worst than the same circuit with a toroid with a higher resistance, and they both are resonating at the same frequency and have the same inductance. According to the text books, a circuit with a lower resistance should be more efficient than a circuit with a higher resistance when at resonance.....but it's not in Luc's experiment.
GB
He didn't state what the pictured circuit was, I see something resonating
nicely along at eight volts to the gate and and something else not resonating
very well as the load. The load Q~=1.0 and the phase shift is nearly 180
degrees out-of-phase with the input - that's hard to do. It reminds me of
that air core coil. ;D
:S:Mark
I believe it may be time for another one of my tried and true famous quotes.
" I made a lot more electricity with steel than I ever made with copper "
- Ed Leedskalnin
Regards...
Quote from: skywatcher on March 29, 2010, 04:15:13 PM
@Luc:
I just watched your video #13. Did i understand it correctly that the circuit runs without the function generator connected (only for starting it) and without any other outside connections ?
???
@skywatcher
This is correct; about @49ua - 100uW is coming out from the caps.
I estimate about 200mW about 1/5W could be made available from
the pickup coil. - Because he hasn't done the max(P)=E^2/R. Which
would match the output impedance of the coil to the (1K) load resistor.
So this is *way* overunity.... If he would build the HF AC transformer/
voltage multiplier he could run the cap by charging it, running the current
backwards. Then solving that problem, we could prove OU on you-tube. :-X
:S:MarkSCoffman
Quote from: mscoffman on March 29, 2010, 04:40:26 PM
This is correct; about @49ua - 100uW is coming out from the caps.
I estimate about 200mW about 1/5W could be made available from
the pickup coil. - Because he hasn't done the max(P)=E^2/R. Which
would match the output impedance of the coil to the (1K) load resistor.
So this is *way* overunity.... If he would build the HF AC transformer/
voltage multiplier he could run the cap by charging it, running the current
backwards. Then solving that problem, we could prove OU on you-tube. :-X
I think it's time for a new circuit diagram... it's difficult to see it from the video. ???
One problem for replication is that we don't know the exact properties of the ferrite core. There are many types of ferrite, and in most cases you don't know them. Additionally there are tape-cores like Nanoperm etc...
I never got any clear resonance with any of my cores. :(
Quote from: mscoffman on March 29, 2010, 04:16:37 PM
He didn't state what the pictured circuit was, I see something resonating
nicely along at eight volts to the gate and and something else not resonating
very well as the load. The load Q~=1.0 and the phase shift is nearly 180
degrees out-of-phase with the input - that's hard to do. It reminds me of
that air core coil. ;D
:S:Mark
I think you're referring to a different experiment than I am. I was referring to the toroid/air coil experiment and you're referring to his latest experiment.
GB
Hi everyone,
I made a new video to try to explain to the best of my understanding what makes this circuit work.
You can watch the video if you want but it's kind of boring as I'm not doing all that much.
Link to Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N8BehANEVUo
Here is how I understand it at this time.
A magnet is needed, a ferrite core seems to be important also but what I think is very important is INDUCTANCE. This is what I mostly say in the above video, so you can watch it if you want or just read this.
Lets say we have a toroid or an open end FERRITE core coil an its inductance is 1 Henry. We know by adding a permanent magnet to the core the coils inductance will drop depending on the strength of the magnet or the saturation point of the core.
I'm quite sure the effect of returned energy works best with the strongest magnet! BUT as I stated above if the magnet is strong you may be left with next to no inductance. The 1 Henry coil you start with can easily go down to 10mH (Milli Henry)
What maybe happening when a permanent magnet (PM) is added to a coils core is when the coil is energized its electromagnetic field pushes against the permanent magnet field and once the coil is switched off the PM flux bounces back. This is where the return energy is coming from.
Now if we think about it, then we want the most powerful bounce back. So we want a strong magnet!... BUT a strong magnet will reduce your inductance next to nothing as stated above!... who cares, just build it right!... Wrong!... Inductance is what your coil needs to be able to create a strong Electromagnetic field to push against those strong magnets. So if you're left with only 10mH your coil will need a high voltage with much current to be able to create a strong enough push against the PM.
Now for the other problem. If you wind a Mega Inductance coil that reaches the 10 Henry mark it will need much wire length... who cares, just build it right!... Wrong!...wire length give resistance and resistance gives energy losses and not to mention coil reaction time (electromagnetic field building time).
So all these things need to be considered to get the right balance. So what do we do?
I have found and been trying to demonstrate and share since my ORBO replication that if you wind 2 coils in perfect half moons on a ferrite core the Inductance is close to double then the standard single coil toroid. Would this not be a coil design to consider for the above project?... hum... let's see, twice the inductance and no extra resistance then the standard coil. Sounds good to me! but you decide.
I built mine with 30 AWG which has much resistance and ended with only 6.9 Ohms and over 1 Henry inductance. I would recommend using 20 AWG or a thicker wire if your cores are large enough and wind it to 2 Henry or more if you can. But like I said many things need to be considered, like the total coil resistance, coil reactance time, PM strength to core saturation limit, the right inductance to push the pm field and also the right inductance to bring the coil to resonance. Yes! Resonance, another area to consider and important if you want the coil to be efficient.
Resonance is what's going on when I've been demonstrating the energy going back to the source. This is why I started this topic to bring this possibility to light. JLN has not found this effect yet, as I think his residual inductance is very small with the magnets used. He would need a much high frequency then he's been using to see it. However I do agree with him that the energy comes from magnets push back when coil is switched off. The other thing that is needed is a MOSFET as switch to see the resonance effect unless you add capacitance. It appears that the built in capacitance of a mosfet is what is most likely bringing the coil to resonance. I tried it with a regular transistor and nothing happens.
The other interesting finding I have is, the mosfet can self oscillate (switch) itself IF the right combination of inductance between the main coil and pulse coil (added between gate & source) as long as the circuit is tuned to the resonance range. By using a 3vdc feed, my dual coil toroid, IRF640 and tuning coil have achieved resonance to any frequency I want between 5KHz to 50KHz WITHOUT the use of capacitors. Many of the frequency Inductance values have been documented and someone from here is working out a formula that will be shared with all.
The above is the description to the best of my ability at this time of what is going on in the circuit at this time.
Hope this helps some to better understanding what I've been trying to share.
Luc
Quote from: gravityblock on March 29, 2010, 01:08:59 PM
I can't speak for Luc, but I don't think his intent is to use the air coil. What he was trying to demonstrate, is why does the circuit with an air coil and a lower resistance, perform worst than the same circuit with a toroid with a higher resistance, and they both are resonating at the same frequency and have the same inductance. According to the text books, a circuit with a lower resistance should be more efficient than a circuit with a higher resistance when at resonance.....but it's not in Luc's experiment.
GB
GB, you're right on the money ;)
Glad someone understands me and can explain it better than me ;D
To all, I don't use the Brooks air core. It was just used for that video. My tuning coil is a ferrite core.
Luc
Hi Luc,
I wanted to answer for your Reply #377 above when I have just seen your latest mail with the new video. Just finished reading and watching it and for a moment I wondered whether I include my reply written earlier or not because it would sound I am against any overunity... or that I explain away your findings with conventional text book talk.
Well, I can assure you I am very open to overunity, have been trying to think outside the box for a long time BUT still first I try to watch things first whether with conventional knowledge and experience I can or cannot understand a 'strange' circuit, a setup etc. I am all for scientific reality, try to remain scientific and if I cannot undertand something then first I admit I do not know it and second I seek for help and dig into it if I can.
So here is my reply to your last but one mail #377, I did not change anything in it now that I have read your latest reply.
--------
Hi Luc,
Thanks for the answers, please when you have time measure the toroidal coil's inductance you have had in the oscillator with the scope shots. Is it still 113.5mH? Also, would be good to know the pulse coil's inductance and DC resistance, when separated from the gate-source pins, ok?
I do not agree that the IRF640 does not use external energy for its operation, sorry. The 3.8 mW or so power must be the reactive power inside the pulse coil which must be parallel resonant with the gate-source and gate-drain capacitors. This resonant circuit receives energy kicks from the drain pulses via the gate-drain cap, (Crss) the latter acting as a coupling capacitor. The drain side voltage pulse has a low duty cycle and the toroidal coil is not in resonance.
This circuit you tuned with excellent ingenuity to perform as the scope shot shows and consume just 14uA from 3V reminds me to a Class C oscillator circuit, here is such with a bipolar transistor:
http://www.tpub.com/content/neets/14181/css/14181_80.htm
Yours would be called tuned-gate Hartley oscillator. In the above link, the L2C1 circuit receives energy kicks from the collector side via the coupling coil, L1.
This is the key explanation there: "Once every cycle, the transistor conducts for a short period of time (class C operation) and returns enough energy to the tank to ensure a constant amplitude output signal."
In your case, the MOSFET is able to conduct when the positive voltage peaks across the pulse coil are just over the MOSFET Vth threshold gate source limit, this means when the positive sinus wave goes above 2V (lower limit for the IRF640) with respect to the source i.e. when it comes up from the negative values via zero crossing and climbs up to its peak value, just reaching and passing through the threshold limit, the FET switches ON.
I agree with you that the MOSFET capacitances contribute to the operation of this oscillator, and at the gate source side the Ciss resonates the pulse coil at 20 kHz.
Thank you for the video demo offering, no need for it. And on the 2 Ohm addition I wrote before: I did not mean it would make it help oscillate but meant to reduce the extra current the lower copper resistance caused because I thought its extra load may explain you failure to find the same sweet spot like you found with the toroidal core.
Now that I saw you had written on the other forum you had swept through in frequency and did not find any 'sweet' spot with the air core coil, it indicates something is 'wrong' we do not yet know of. I 'suspect' you intend to redo the air core coil, I will return to it later how to test its Q if needed.
-----
Comments are welcome from other members too.
Regards, Gyula
Quote from: mscoffman on March 29, 2010, 04:16:37 PM
He didn't state what the pictured circuit was, I see something resonating
nicely along at eight volts to the gate and and something else not resonating
very well as the load. The load Q~=1.0 and the phase shift is nearly 180
degrees out-of-phase with the input - that's hard to do. It reminds me of
that air core coil. ;D
:S:Mark
Hi Mark,
the nice sine wave is the (Ferrite core) Pulse coil in Resonance. So the top peaks of the Sine Wave is what is switching the mosfet on and off.
I can now do this at any frequency from 5KHz to 50Khz
Luc
Quote from: skywatcher on March 29, 2010, 04:15:13 PM
@Luc:
I just watched your video #13. Did i understand it correctly that the circuit runs without the function generator connected (only for starting it) and without any other outside connections ?
???
Yes skywatcher, you understood correctly. I can even start it just by tapping the positive connection. No signal generator even needed.
Luc
Quote from: gotoluc on March 29, 2010, 05:20:59 PM
The other interesting finding I have is, the mosfet can self oscillate (switch) itself IF the right combination of inductance between the main coil and pulse coil (added between gate & source) as long as the circuit is tuned to the resonance range. By using a 3vdc feed, my dual coil toroid, IRF640 and tuning coil have achieved resonance to any frequency I want between 5KHz to 50KHz WITHOUT the use of capacitors. Many of the frequency Inductance values have been documented and someone from here is working out a formula that will be shared with all.
The above is the description to the best of my ability at this time of what is going on in the circuit at this time.
Hope this helps some to better understanding what I've been trying to share.
Luc
It appears the IRF640 is changing in capacitance according to the frequency. The input capacitance of the IRF640 is 6 times greater than the output capacitance according to the specific test conditions from the manufacture (which the frequency may have a relationship to this input/output capacitance ratio, so the two coils would have this relationship in their inductance). But then, you have the reverse transfer capacitance also, which could play a role in the formula. This is my best guess since you're not sharing the frequency inductance values with the rest of us. I guess everybody else here is incompetent, except for the one person you shared the values with.
Could you please post the data, so others can work on a formula also. I probably won't be able to figure it out, but I like a good puzzle. We may have a better understanding if you share with the rest of us, instead of sharing with a single individual. We don't have a diagram of the circuit or any data with this new setup. This is B.S. You call this sharing? I thought we were a community, working together to find a solution.
Thanks
GB
Quote from: gyulasun on March 29, 2010, 05:58:48 PM
<...>
--------
Hi Luc,
Thanks for the answers, please when you have time measure the toroidal coil's inductance you have had in the oscillator with the scope shots. Is it still 113.5mH? Also, would be good to know the pulse coil's inductance and DC resistance, when separated from the gate-source pins, ok?
I do not agree that the IRF640 does not use external energy for its operation, sorry. The 3.8 mW or so power must be the reactive power inside the pulse coil which must be parallel resonant with the gate-source and gate-drain capacitors. This resonant circuit receives energy kicks from the drain pulses via the gate-drain cap, (Crss) the latter acting as a coupling capacitor. The drain side voltage pulse has a low duty cycle and the toroidal coil is not in resonance.
This circuit you tuned with excellent ingenuity to perform as the scope shot shows and consume just 14uA from 3V reminds me to a Class C oscillator circuit, here is such with a bipolar transistor:
http://www.tpub.com/content/neets/14181/css/14181_80.htm
Yours would be called tuned-gate Hartley oscillator. In the above link, the L2C1 circuit receives energy kicks from the collector side via the coupling coil, L1.
This is the key explanation there: "Once every cycle, the transistor conducts for a short period of time (class C operation) and returns enough energy to the tank to ensure a constant amplitude output signal."
In your case, the MOSFET is able to conduct when the positive voltage peaks across the pulse coil are just over the MOSFET Vth threshold gate source limit, this means when the positive sinus wave goes above 2V (lower limit for the IRF640) with respect to the source i.e. when it comes up from the negative values via zero crossing and climbs up to its peak value, just reaching and passing through the threshold limit, the FET switches ON.
I agree with you that the MOSFET capacitances contribute to the operation of this oscillator, and at the gate source side the Ciss resonates the pulse coil at 20 kHz.
<...>
-----
Comments are welcome from other members too.
Regards, Gyula
Hi Gyula,
The inductance of the main coil depends on the frequency specified for the resonance to happen... So at for example 8Khz, the main coil mH is much higher then when the circuit is operating at say 20Khz. We might say it the other way around.. The inductance mainly dictates at which frequency the circuit would work [this is in combination with the given mosfet due to the mosfets Capacitance].
The pulse coils inductance is again depending on the inductance of the main coil... I *think* the resistance of the pulse coil was rather high... some 50 Ohm or so... not sure. Maybe Luc can tell.
QuoteI do not agree that the IRF640 does not use external energy for its operation, sorry. The 3.8 mW or so power must be the reactive power inside the pulse coil which must be parallel resonant with the gate-source and gate-drain capacitors.
Not sure how to interpret this? I think Luc refers to the fact that the switching energy needed for the mosfet itself, *might* be greater then what the circuit as whole is consuming.... Say at 8Khz, 3Vdc the circuit takes 0.000014A, which would be 42uW of consumption. Then *if* the mosfet would use some 3+mW or so for its *own* switching, then where is that coming from, because the circuit only uses 42uW in the first place. In other words, does the [in this case] IRF640 switched at 8Khz uses more or less then this 42uW of energy normally for it's switching. I agree however that this 42uW is coming from a battery or capacitor.
I think the key point in here is determine *exactly* what the IRF640 would theoretically consume in energy when it is being switched on and off at the 8Khz rate, with the given info, as we know the circuit energy usage as a whole.
--
NextGen67
Quote from: gravityblock on March 29, 2010, 07:37:16 PM
It appears the IRF640 is changing in capacitance according to the frequency. The input capacitance of the IRF640 is 6 times greater than the output capacitance according to the specific test conditions from the manufacture (which the frequency may have a relationship to this input/output capacitance ratio, so the two coils would have this relationship in their inductance). But then, you have the reverse transfer capacitance also, which could play a role in the formula. This is my best guess since you're not sharing the frequency inductance values with the rest of us. I guess everybody else here is incompetent, except for the one person you shared the values with.
Could you please post the data, so others can work on a formula also. I probably won't be able to figure it out, but I like a good puzzle. We may have a better understanding if you share with the rest of us, instead of sharing with a single individual. This is B.S. I thought we were a community, working together to find a solution.
Thanks
GB
Actually the capacitance [for any mosfet] is changing according to the given voltage, so you could actually keep the capacitance the same for any given frequency... Only need to adjust the coils inductance of course.
Yes, the two coils will definitely have their relationship, that is why the pulse coil it's inductance is depended on the main coils inductance. It *might* be possible maybe to come up with a pulse coil that adjust itself according to the inductance of the main coil.
I'm sure Luc will post some data later on, but I can imagine he's rather busy with things, and he might want to include some other models then only an IRF640? Because that would allow anyone to figure out better how to work out the relationships, so that a formula can be determined that works in any given situation and with any mosfet one plugs in [of course would need to know the mosfets specifics for that, and the capacitance of the mosfet would need to allow for a certain 'off' range].
--
NextGen67
Quote from: NextGen67 on March 29, 2010, 08:53:22 PM
Actually the capacitance [for any mosfet] is changing according to the given voltage, so you could actually keep the capacitance the same for any given frequency... Only need to adjust the coils inductance of course.
--
NextGen67
That is not how I understand Luc's description. He said, 3vdc is feeding the mosfet, and it was able to self-oscillate to any frequency between 5KHz to 50KHz WITHOUT the use of capacitors. He didn't say anything about changing the voltage feeding the mosfet in order to change the capacitance for a given resonate frequency. If he's not changing the voltage, then it can only happen if the two coils have the proper relationship in their inductances and the capacitance of the mosfet is changing with the frequency. Please correct me if I am wrong, Luc.
If you change the frequency, then the capacitance must also change accordingly in order to be in resonance. Their is only one frequency where the capacitance reactance and inductive reactance are equal. If the frequency changes, then the capacitance must be changed also, in order to be in resonance.
Thanks,
GB
Quote from: NextGen67 on March 29, 2010, 08:53:22 PM
I'm sure Luc will post some data later on, but I can imagine he's rather busy with things, and he might want to include some other models then only an IRF640?
NextGen67
He's already given the data to another person to analyze. It should only require a simple copy and paste in order to post it here. It would take a few minutes at the most.
In fact, it would have required the same amount of time and work to post the data here, for all to see, as it did to send it to an individual. It makes me feel like the rest of this community is irrelevant. I guess the individual who received the data, doesn't have time to post it either. It's almost like he agreed or doesn't want to post the data. No video. Totally left in the dark until they figure the formula out. Why is this being done behind closed doors?
I guess they want to find the formula, so they can make an agreement with Stefan, so nobody else can claim the OU prize based on this formula. This sounds all too familiar to me, because it's already been played out on this forum. That OU prize makes some people not post important information on this forum. This holds everybody back. This isn't how an open source community works.
GB
Quote from: gravityblock on March 29, 2010, 10:00:10 PM
He's already given the data to another person to analyze. It should only require a simple copy and paste in order to post it here. It would take a few minutes at the most.
In fact, it would have required the same amount of time and work to post the data here, for all to see, as it did to send it to an individual. It makes me feel like the rest of this community is irrelevant. I guess the individual who received the data, doesn't have time to post it either. It's almost like he agreed or doesn't want to post the data. No video. Totally left in the dark until they figure the formula out. Why is this being done behind closed doors?
I guess they want to find the formula, so they can make an agreement with Stefan, so nobody else can claim the OU prize based on this formula. This sounds all too familiar to me, because it's already been played out on this forum. That OU prize makes some people not post important information on this forum. This holds everybody back. This isn't how an open source community works.
GB
Based on what I've seen of gotoluc I think you are totally wrong in that assumption. He has a very caring and very open source save-the-world mindset. If anything he simply wants to verify things so he does not mislead anyone into wasting time or money on something that may not give results they want.
@gotoluc
Just wanted to confirm the inductance using my dual bucking toroid.
Lot's of fun with this one.
Inductance is only useful when it gets disconnected.
Capacitance is only useful when it is connected.
Both can pitch and catch, so more inductance like you show is preferable especially in the Ozone Mode where inductance plays a major role.
I wonder if the mosfet was inline between the two coils, connecting and disconnecting what would happen?????
Its a Buckbuck . =] Sorry, It was a name we use to call our friend who was on steroids where his upper body was huge and his legs were skinny like a chicken, Buckbuck.
Just a lil humor. =]
Mags
Quote from: gravityblock on March 29, 2010, 09:06:58 PM
That is not how I understand Luc's description. He said, 3vdc is feeding the mosfet, and it was able to self-oscillate to any frequency between 5KHz to 50KHz WITHOUT the use of capacitors. He didn't say anything about changing the voltage feeding the mosfet in order to change the capacitance for a given resonate frequency. If he's not changing the voltage, then it can only happen if the two coils have the proper relationship in their inductances and the capacitance of the mosfet is changing with the frequency. Please correct me if I am wrong, Luc.
If you change the frequency, then the capacitance must also change accordingly in order to be in resonance. Their is only one frequency where the capacitance reactance and inductive reactance are equal. If the frequency changes, then the capacitance must be changed also, in order to be in resonance.
Thanks,
GB
Hi GB,
correct the voltage is fixed at 3vdc. The pulse coil is any coil you want to use but it must have a ferrite core. I used a shaded pole motor coil and was just sliding a long ferrite rod in or out to vary the inductance. For the main toroid I have a large 1" cube neo magnet that is fixed and about 1" away from the toroid which I slide in and out to change its inductance.
We would appreciate you not jump the gun and make conclusions of what others or myself maybe doing. Think about it. If I wanted to hold back information do you think I would say in my post that someone is looking over the data ???
I've attached the sample scope shots so you or anyone can look at them if interested. I sent it to an individual who offered to help in order to find a simple formula for interested replicators.
At this time I have too many things on my plate. So I will not answer questions related to these scope shots. The details are in the
Title of each scope shot. So if you can figure out a table of some kind or create a Java calculator program them please share what you can do to help.
As you say, this is a group effort and I am a strong believer of that principal if you know me or my way of life and past public forum sharing history.
Thanks for sharing.
Luc
Quote from: e2matrix on March 29, 2010, 11:53:50 PM
Based on what I've seen of gotoluc I think you are totally wrong in that assumption. He has a very caring and very open source save-the-world mindset. If anything he simply wants to verify things so he does not mislead anyone into wasting time or money on something that may not give results they want.
Thanks e2matrix :)
you know me well and thanks for bringing this important point up. I hate waste! that's why I keep picking up microwaves, crt monitors from the garbage and try to strip all the stuff I can reuse instead of filling dumps and buying new. I would hate to see a hole bunch of replicators buy new stuff for something that is not proven yet. Give me more time and I'll give you a list with all parts and details if this really works. If you can't wait another 5 days or so then don't blame me for parts you bought for nothing :P
Luc
Quote from: wattsup on March 30, 2010, 12:26:54 AM
@gotoluc
Just wanted to confirm the inductance using my dual bucking toroid.
Lot's of fun with this one.
Inductance is only useful when it gets disconnected.
Capacitance is only useful when it is connected.
Both can pitch and catch, so more inductance like you show is preferable especially in the Ozone Mode where inductance plays a major role.
I wonder if the mosfet was inline between the two coils, connecting and disconnecting what would happen?????
Thanks wattsup for posting and sharing your findings here ;)
Luc
Quote from: gravityblock on March 29, 2010, 09:06:58 PM
That is not how I understand Luc's description. <...>
If you change the frequency, then the capacitance must also change accordingly in order to be in resonance. Their is only one frequency where the capacitance reactance and inductive reactance are equal. If the frequency changes, then the capacitance must be changed also, in order to be in resonance.
Thanks,
GB
Hi gravityblock,
I might have expressed myself not clearly.
I mean we can keep the mosfet Capacitance the same [at 3V DC in Luc's example], and still be able to choose any desired frequency [within limits].
By variation of the coil
inductance instead, we can chose any frequency *without* changing the capacitance.
Edit: It might be clear that with ' *without* changing the capacitance ', I mean the capacitance of the mosfet it's C's during a full cycle... I don't talk in terms of 'in the progess of switching on and off'.
--
NextGen67
@Luc:
Thanks for posting the data. Isn't it based on the standard formula as shown below. I'll work on a resonance calculator.
Here's the formula:
Fr = .159 / square root of LC
Fr = the resonant frequency in hertz
L = the inductance in henries
C = the capacitance in farads
I really do appreciate your work, I apologize for being hard on you (it was uncalled for).
GB
Quote from: NextGen67 on March 29, 2010, 08:38:49 PM
Hi Gyula,
The inductance of the main coil depends on the frequency specified for the resonance to happen... So at for example 8Khz, the main coil mH is much higher then when the circuit is operating at say 20Khz. We might say it the other way around.. The inductance mainly dictates at which frequency the circuit would work [this is in combination with the given mosfet due to the mosfets Capacitance].
The pulse coils inductance is again depending on the inductance of the main coil... I *think* the resistance of the pulse coil was rather high... some 50 Ohm or so... not sure. Maybe Luc can tell.
Hi NextGen67,
I understand and agree with what you said here. The MOSFET at such low frequencies mainly have capacitances what do influence the oscillating frequency. And these capacitances change by the pulse voltage amplitudes between its electrodes, what we have to consider in this respect is the change from zero to the peak pulse voltages of cca 10-11V. The effect of these capacitance changes may cause but a few kHz change, this rate of change also depends on the frequency whether we are at 5kHz or 20kHz.
And then there remains the change of the inductances by you to tune the frequency in a much wider range if desired, and you always have to adjust both inductances (sometimes only the one in the gate-source) for the 'correct' values to insure oscillation at a new frequency, this is quite normal and accepted. The problem of self-starting remains to be solved at certain frequency ranges, this surely depends on the amplitude and phase conditions ruling in the circuit (just like in any oscillator circuit) when you just apply the 3V supply to start.
Thanks for the possible pulse coil DC resistance estimation, it is possibly correct if Luc uses that coil taken from a shaded pole motor: my good news is that if this coil has indeed 10-20 Ohm or higher DC resistance then the reactive power circulating in it could be increased freely by using a coil with similar inductance but wound with thicker wire so that the copper loss should reduce, the peak to peak gate-source voltage could go up to 30-35V or so peak to peak, the limit is the max +/-20V from the data sheet. (+/-20V=40Vpp) However if you increase the Q factor of this coil by using thicker wire, you have to consider the adjustment for self oscillation becomes more cumbersome (gate-source voltage amplitude changes quicker with the higher Q if you adjust the position of the ferrite rod).
Quote
QuoteI do not agree that the IRF640 does not use external energy for its operation, sorry. The 3.8 mW or so power must be the reactive power inside the pulse coil which must be parallel resonant with the gate-source and gate-drain capacitors.
Not sure how to interpret this? I think Luc refers to the fact that the switching energy needed for the mosfet itself, *might* be greater then what the circuit as whole is consuming.... Say at 8Khz, 3Vdc the circuit takes 0.000014A, which would be 42uW of consumption. Then *if* the mosfet would use some 3+mW or so for its *own* switching, then where is that coming from, because the circuit only uses 42uW in the first place. In other words, does the [in this case] IRF640 switched at 8Khz uses more or less then this 42uW of energy normally for it's switching. I agree however that this 42uW is coming from a battery or capacitor.
I think the key point in here is determine *exactly* what the IRF640 would theoretically consume in energy when it is being switched on and off at the 8Khz rate, with the given info, as we know the circuit energy usage as a whole.
--
NextGen67
Well, first of all, I have to correct myself on the 3+mW (I wrote 3.8mW minimum) because I used data sheet numbers for the gate to sorce and gate to drain 'Miller' charge quantity but it was connected to conditions higly different from the 3V and microamper drain current range (what is given is charges needed at 160V drain voltage and 18A drain current). Sorry for this and I would like to correct my mistake as follows:
From Luc scope shot (Reply #345, 2 pages back) we see the gate source voltage is 7.75V peak to peak. This is its maximum value and means all the energy swinging in that LC parallel resonant circuit is stored in the input capacitance, C
iss of the FET. From data sheet, C
iss consists of about 1600pF gate source and about 500pF gate drain capacitances at the 3V drain voltage, together it is 2.1nF.
Now if you calculate the stored energy in this cap (.5CV
2) you get .063uWs (microWatt second) energy. If you relate this energy to 50us (one time period for 20kHz) you get 1.26mW power, this swings in the resonant circuit in every 50us. This is called reactive power, it changes at every fraction of moment, if you try to extract it, then the effect of any load manifests as a loss in the LC circuit, consuming from this swinging energy, hence you have to take it from the battery for making up for the loss.
So eventually 1.2mW peak reactive power circulates in the gate source circuit (my earlier 3.8mW came from not relevant data sheet calcs), this controls the gate and the loss in it is supplied from the 3V by the 14 - 20uA current taken from it.
rgds, Gyula
Quote from: gravityblock on March 30, 2010, 09:04:03 AM
@Luc:
Thanks for posting the data. Isn't it based on the standard formula as shown below. I'll work on a resonance calculator.
Here's the formula:
Fr = .159 / square root of LC
Fr = the resonant frequency in hertz
L = the inductance in henries
C = the capacitance in farads
I really do appreciate your work, I apologize for being hard on you (it was uncalled for).
GB
That's great GB if you can figure this out and a bigger bonus if you can create the calculator program.
I must let you know that each one of those scope shots the coils are tuned to the point where the circuit uses the less amount of current. So one little change like a drop in inductance on the pulse coil and the circuit stops as at this point it is just using the tops of the resonating sine waves to switch. So if one wants to start the circuit by just taping the positive feed connection it would work if you would raise the inductance of the pulse coil by a little and then when the circuit is started it can be dropped to the most efficient point. But keep in mind that if it goes too low there is nothing that can start it as not enough energy is at the pulse coil to trigger the gate.
I think using mosfets with a smaller gate voltage would have much benefit for this and should show more energy gains since so much less energy from the mail coil will need to go to the pulse coil which will have a drop in inductance from the test data I did.
Hope this helps.
Luc
Here's a resonance calculator I found on-line, http://www3.telus.net/chemelec/Calculators/LC-Calculator.htm
Enter the total inductance of both coils, then enter the capacitance, somewhere between 900 -1000 picofarads. The capacitance appears to be varying slightly. It's coming really close to the actual resonance frequency.
I'll see if I can find a better solution.
GB
Quote from: gravityblock on March 30, 2010, 09:04:03 AM
@Luc:
Thanks for posting the data. Isn't it based on the standard formula as shown below. I'll work on a resonance calculator.
Here's the formula:
Fr = .159 / square root of LC
Fr = the resonant frequency in hertz
L = the inductance in henries
C = the capacitance in farads
I really do appreciate your work, I apologize for being hard on you (it was uncalled for).
GB
Hi GB,
It is the Thomson formula for LC resonance calculations, there are several online calculators for this, here is one I already included several of my answers to Luc or else:
http://www.whatcircuits.com/lc-resonance-frequency-calculator/
Sorry for not able to answer to you on this, hope it is not too late for you.
rgds, Gyula
I hope this doesn't seem unrelated, but I'm working with Luc's setup and trying variations to which this applies.
I worked out a circuit to get an AC square wave pulse to drive my parallel resonant circuit for the coil, however, it ends up with:
555 timer x 1
p-mos x 1
n-mos x 5
I spent quite some time foraging through google before I came up with this solution - however it seems ungainly (a lot of components! I'm new to electronics in general) - does anyone know of an easier way to turn a 12V source into an AC square wave?
You can view the circuit at
http://www.falstad.com/circuit/
And then import the schematic I'm attaching to this post.
Also, I appreciate all of the work that's being shared here, I know I haven't posted much, but I try to refrain unless I have something new and or original to say. Most of what I'm seeing others are seeing and posting in more than sufficient detail to warrant a post from myself :D Thanks all
HI Gyula, Gb,
Yes, those are the standard tools to find out either L, C or Freq...
However, to complete the picture, it would be nice to come up with a rule to determine the Capacitance of the mosfet being used (using the data from it's data sheet)...
Something Like:
Enter Ciss
Enter Coss
Enter Crss
Enter Rds(on)
Enter Vgs(th) [ or enter input voltage ]
Enter Vgs [ or enter tank voltage ]
And then the formula would spit out the C[apacitance] value that matches Luc's data (and for any given mosfet).
As for his IRF640 data, one can see that all Frequency's hang around 1533 to 1579 pF. The value of 1578.54 pF probably having the most accurate [and best/lowest 0.0000xx result ]
--
NextGen67
Hi everyone,
I decided to make a video using the 2 identical toroid's of test 15 video to demonstrate what I had done for myself yesterday that the magnet affects a ferrite core toroid more than just dropping it's inductance.
Below are the scope shot of each at the peak efficiency tuning points.
Please note that I had a little bit of tuning problems with the magnet toroid as the efficiency tuning point is super sensitive compared to the non magnet toroid. But I got it at the end just before the 10 minute limit.
Link to video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zQxL9W6gVG4
It is also clear by comparing the data of the two shots that there is a gain in the magnet toroid and this is with identical generator gain to each test as I did not touch the generator output.
Luc
remember that http://www.rexresearch.com/szili/szili.htm
Quote from: forest on March 30, 2010, 02:31:36 PM
remember that http://www.rexresearch.com/szili/szili.htm
The experiment shown is based on what we now know is faulty.
This circuit supposedly tuned for max overunity actually
represents the worst case of gate energy being made available
to a low voltage supply. Is some overunity energy in there?
We can not tell.
:S:MarkSCoffman
Quote from: gotoluc on March 30, 2010, 02:06:21 PM
Hi everyone,
I decided to make a video using the 2 identical toroid's of test 15 video to demonstrate what I had done for myself yesterday that the magnet affects a ferrite core toroid more than just dropping it's inductance.
Below are the scope shot of each at the peak efficiency tuning points.
Please note that I had a little bit of tuning problems with the magnet toroid as the efficiency tuning point is super sensitive compared to the non magnet toroid. But I got it at the end just before the 10 minute limit.
Link to video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zQxL9W6gVG4
It is also clear by comparing the data of the two shots that there is a gain in the magnet toroid and this is with identical generator gain to each test as I did not touch the generator output.
Luc
Hi Luc,
Could you make a test for me? It would be this:
Just connect a 533pF capacitor (ceramic or mica or any normal capacitor) in parallel with the toroidal coil that has your split wound coil and also the magnet attached and please repeat the same test you showed in your present video but this time you would find resonance also at around 6kHz like in case of the other normally wound coil that has no magnet atteched.
I would be interested to know the current value. No need for making a video on it, just tell. (I know 533pF cannot be had, maybe you could combine some smaller standard values in parallel to make up for it, no problem if you approach it only to +/- 10pF precision, maybe you have a variable capacitor then it would be good to use, together with the C meter first.)
Thanks, Gyula
EDIT: one more thing: would you measure the DC resistances of the two toroidal coils you have used? thanks.
Quote from: NextGen67 on March 30, 2010, 01:40:42 PM
HI Gyula, Gb,
Yes, those are the standard tools to find out either L, C or Freq...
However, to complete the picture, it would be nice to come up with a rule to determine the Capacitance of the mosfet being used (using the data from it's data sheet)...
Something Like:
Enter Ciss
Enter Coss
Enter Crss
Enter Rds(on)
Enter Vgs(th) [ or enter input voltage ]
Enter Vgs [ or enter tank voltage ]
And then the formula would spit out the C[apacitance] value that matches Luc's data (and for any given mosfet).
As for his IRF640 data, one can see that all Frequency's hang around 1533 to 1579 pF. The value of 1578.54 pF probably having the most accurate [and best/lowest 0.0000xx result ]
--
NextGen67
NextGen,
Sorry I do not fully get you, something is foggy: what kind of formula do you think of?
And for the IRF640, which capacitance is the 1578.54pF ? Ciss, Cgs, Coss? How did you get it?
By the way, would it not be better to wait for the person referred to by Luc what he comes up with first?
Gyula
Quote from: gotoluc on March 30, 2010, 02:06:21 PM
I decided to make a video using the 2 identical toroid's of test 15 video to demonstrate what I had done for myself yesterday that the magnet affects a ferrite core toroid more than just dropping it's inductance.
It's clear that it does more. Imagine that the magnet brings the core close to saturation. If you are feeding a sine wave into your coil, without the magnet it would create a magnetic flux which changes its direction as the current changes its direction. Let's say, you get a megnetic flux inside the core which changes between -100 mT to +100 mT. If the core has a saturation flux of 1 T, and with the magnet you create a flux of 950 mT inside the core, you get a bias from the magnet, and if you apply your sine wave the flux is centered at 950 mT with +/- 100 mT, but because the saturation flux is 1000 mT it will be clipped. So you have some kind of asymmetric behavior here.
This could, as i already explained some days ago, also have the effect of 'magnetic rectification' which might explain some of the strange effects.
Quote from: gotoluc on March 29, 2010, 06:05:48 PM
Yes skywatcher, you understood correctly. I can even start it just by tapping the positive connection. No signal generator even needed.
Luc
What about the battery ? Is it connected only for startup, or all the time ?
Hi everyone,
Since I changed my cap bank meter to a 10 Ohm instead of the 1 Ohm resistor to get more resolution on my meter I'm getting confused. In my latest video test 16 I said the normal wound coil with no magnet was using 320uA and that is not correct!... it is 3.2uA used
Same goes for the toroid with magnet I said it was returning -350uA and it is -3.5uA returning.
It will take me some time to adjust using the 10 Ohm but it's worth it as it gives me much better resolution. Maybe I should even go to 100 Ohms!... but I don't have a 1%
I also decided to retest the 20KHz self pulse test I posted on page 26 first post. The more accurate reading is 17.5uA and not 14uA
I also took a new scope shot of it once it was tuned to the most efficient and is below.
Sorry for the confusion in video test 16
@Gyula, I'll do the test you asked by adding the capacitance and post the results.
Luc
Quote from: skywatcher on March 30, 2010, 06:23:53 PM
What about the battery ? Is it connected only for startup, or all the time ?
Hi skywatcher,
yes battery still needs to be connected as it is using 18uA but at least it is creating its own energy for the mosfet switch at 20KHz.
This is an accomplishment on its own! as I don't know of a pulse circuit that can create a 20KHz pulse of 7.19vpp with 3vdc at 18uA input. Can think of one?... or anyone else reading this topic?
Hopefully with a new main toroid coil of less DC resistance and a little more inductance we can come to unity or better.
Luc
Quote from: gyulasun on March 30, 2010, 04:53:44 PM
Hi Luc,
Could you make a test for me? It would be this:
Just connect a 533pF capacitor (ceramic or mica or any normal capacitor) in parallel with the toroidal coil that has your split wound coil and also the magnet attached and please repeat the same test you showed in your present video but this time you would find resonance also at around 6kHz like in case of the other normally wound coil that has no magnet attached.
I would be interested to know the current value. No need for making a video on it, just tell. (I know 533pF cannot be had, maybe you could combine some smaller standard values in parallel to make up for it, no problem if you approach it only to +/- 10pF precision, maybe you have a variable capacitor then it would be good to use, together with the C meter first.)
Thanks, Gyula
EDIT: one more thing: would you measure the DC resistances of the two toroidal coils you have used? thanks.
Hi Gyula,
I just completed your test.
I used a 390pf and a 120pf in parallel and it gave me exactly 533pf ;) well, that is what my meter says anyways.
The current is not returning but very close ;) it is at 0.8uA
I have found it to be more efficient when not using capacitors to lower frequency. So this maybe the difference of without the caps in parallel with the coil is sending back 3uA
I took a scope shot of it also so you can see the wave forms and data.
I hope this you
Luc
ADDEDI was actually able to drop it some more by removing the scope probes. I have found that they interfere a little. The lowest I could get it down to is 0.2uA Good thing I could hear the coils 6KHz ;)
Gyula,
I decided to reconnect the no magnet toroid and re-tune it to the best of my ability to use the less current but also keeping the RMS value to the same as the magnet dual coil toroid test above (see scope shot below to compare both). I was able to get the no magnet single coil toroid down to 1.8uA compared to the magnet one above at 0.8uA
There is a small gain using the magnet but by keeping the inductance on the dual coil to the same as the single coil we don't have much much of the PM flux participating in it. Just one 1/2" x 1/8" plus two paper spacers. We need to consider this also.
I think it's time to wind a new toroid. I hate winding toroids :P
A user at the Energetic forum asked me if we had 4 coil sections instead of 2 would the inductance be more than 2 coil sections? I said I don't know ??? what do you think
Thanks for your help
Luc
Quote from: gotoluc on March 30, 2010, 06:49:26 PM
Hi everyone,
Since I changed my cap bank meter to a 10 Ohm instead of the 1 Ohm resistor to get more resolution on my meter I'm getting confused. <...>
It will take me some time to adjust using the 10 Ohm but it's worth it as it gives me much better resolution. Maybe I should even go to 100 Ohms!... but I don't have a 1%
I also decided to retest the 20KHz self pulse test I posted on page 26 first post. The more accurate reading is 17.5uA and not 14uA
<...>
Luc
I don't know if the meter became more accurate?
The difference between 17.5uA and 14uA [being 3.5uA], might be introduced by the 10 Ohm resistor itself? As this resistor is part of the whole circuit, and also uses some energy.
--
NextGen67
Quote from: gyulasun on March 30, 2010, 05:11:32 PM
NextGen,
Sorry I do not fully get you, something is foggy: what kind of formula do you think of?
And for the IRF640, which capacitance is the 1578.54pF ? Ciss, Cgs, Coss? How did you get it?
By the way, would it not be better to wait for the person referred to by Luc what he comes up with first?
Gyula
Hi Gyula,
Well, the standard formula to calculate L,C or F cannot predict C on it's own.
My point is, that it must be somehow possible to get a quite close estimation by using data from the data sheet of the particular mosfet, to -on beforehand- determine what it's 'final' Capacitance 'result' would be when being plugged into Luc's circuit.
The 1578.54 pF is derived from the 5 to 50 Khz scope shots Luc provided... If you put his main coil mH and the belonging frequency for each scope shot in the online LC calculator, you will see that all scope shot frequency's/mH's come to between 1533 and 1580 pF
So if we can get a good estimation of this C value, we might in the first place get a better understanding between Ciss, Coss, Crss, Rds(on), Vgs(th) and Vgs, wrt the circuit, and by such we would be able to find the 'perfecft' match mosfet.
In the 2nd place, it *might* be such, that for optimizing the circuit to 100 percent [well as close to it as possible], we need to know the mosfets C value to begin with, meaning the circuit would be fine tune designed around that value.
My values by the way might differ slightly from online type calculators, as I do calculations the old fashion way ;) .
--
NextGen67
you have to change slightly duty cycle of square wave to get breaks at peaks of sinus
Quote from: gotoluc on March 30, 2010, 10:28:08 PM
Gyula,
I think it's time to wind a new toroid. I hate winding toroids :P
A user at the Energetic forum asked me if we had 4 coil sections instead of 2 would the inductance be more than 2 coil sections? I said I don't know ??? what do you think
Thanks for your help
Luc
This has crossed my mind also. It's a really good question.
GB
Quote from: gotoluc on March 30, 2010, 10:28:08 PM
Gyula,
I decided to reconnect the no magnet toroid and re-tune it to the best of my ability to use the less current but also keeping the RMS value to the same as the magnet dual coil toroid test above (see scope shot below to compare both). I was able to get the no magnet single coil toroid down to 1.8uA compared to the magnet one above at 0.8uA
There is a small gain using the magnet but by keeping the inductance on the dual coil to the same as the single coil we don't have much much of the PM flux participating in it. Just one 1/2" x 1/8" plus two paper spacers. We need to consider this also.
I think it's time to wind a new toroid. I hate winding toroids :P
A user at the Energetic forum asked me if we had 4 coil sections instead of 2 would the inductance be more than 2 coil sections? I said I don't know ??? what do you think
Thanks for your help
Luc
Hi Luc,
Thank you for the test. I asked it because normally at such low audio frequencies toroidal cores give higher Q at a few kHz higher frequency (6kHz --> 8kHz) and, besides, higher frequency involves higher inductive reactance too (in the inductive reactance formula the reactance linearly increases with the frequency, (X
L=2*pi*f*L), so does the resonant impedance, Z=Q*X
L.
And if the resonant impedance is higher at a higher frequency wrt a lower frequency, the MOSFET will draw less current at its drain side when switches ON, this is the same as if you were using a ,say, a 50 kOhm resistor in the drain (instead of the coil) at 6kHz and then you were using ,say, a 70 kOhm resistor at 8.3kHz: obviously the the current draw would be less in the latter case.
And your split wound coil definitely must have a lower self capacitance with respect to the normally wound coil, I estimated the 533pF as being a close match to reality: your split wound coil may have 533pF LESS self capacitance than the normally wound.
This means that if you split the coil into ,say, four parts (for four quarters) you surely will have a coil with even less self capacitance. However, I can only GUESS whether the inductance in this case increases four times instead of the double value, maybe yes.
I think it also would be useful to test the two coils (the ones you kindly tested for me yesterday) in the following way: please see Diagram 4 in this link: http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/experiment/lab/expt3/expt3.html
You could use the same C capacitor for both coils in parallel, its value could be anything between 1000 and 1200pF what you can find and combine, at 6kHz the 635mH coils should resonate with 1108pF. The R resistor in the Diagram shows your coils DC resistance, no need for putting there anything.
It is possible you would have to use 470kOhm or even 1MegaOhm series resistor instead of the 100kOhm shown because the resonant impedances received from toroid coils should be in the several hundred kOHm range.
PLEASE use your Fluke voltage meter in AC to see the voltage V
out at the output , I do not know your Fluke AC input impedance (maybe 1MegaOhm with 20-50pF parallel capacitance, just use a 1-2pF series coupling capacitor at the V
out output to reduce any detuning and loading effect to a minimum. USE the SINE wave setting on the gen (but if you curious, switch to square wave too :) )
You would first search for the resonant maximum output voltage, starting with the normally wound, no magnet coil, paralled with the 10..pF cap. Try to adjust with the signal level control just 10V RMS at the resonant maxed output (input level actually not important now, only the output from the resonant circuit). The reason why I ask the 10V RMS output at resonance is shown here:
http://www.allaboutcircuits.com/vol_2/chpt_6/6.html#22055.png
Now if you detune the signal gen first to a lower frequency so that the output voltage changes gradually from 10V to 7.07V RMS, you notice this frequency, ok? It is possible you need to use a digital frequency meter to better read this lower frequency, if your dial on the generator is rather rough for finer tens or hundreds Hz details. Please tune also to an upper frequency where the output voltage also reduces gradually to 7.07 RMS, and notice this frequency too.
Now if you substract the lower freq (say it is 5.8kHz) from the higher freq (say it is 6.2kHz), the difference is 6.2-5.8= .4kHz The Q value is received if you divide the resonant frequency (say it was exactly 6kHz) with the difference: Q=6/.4=15 it is much possible your toroidal coils will have a much narrower 3dB bandwidth, it means the Q values will be higher, this is why a digital frequncy meter is a neccessity when you detune to the half power points on the resonace curve.
This way we could have a much better inside onto the two different coils, regarding their Q, resonant impedance and self capacitance. And this test setup creates a different circuit 'enviroment' for the coils, namely no nonlinear dynamic MOSFET capacitance.
If you do not understand anything wrt to this test, please ask.
rgds, Gyula
Quote from: skywatcher on March 30, 2010, 06:20:31 PM
It's clear that it does more. Imagine that the magnet brings the core close to saturation. If you are feeding a sine A into your coil, without the magnet it would create a magnetic flux which changes its direction as the current changes its direction. Let's say, you get a megnetic flux inside the core which changes between -100 mT to +100 mT. If the core has a saturation flux of 1 T, and with the magnet you create a flux of 950 mT inside the core, you get a bias from the magnet, and if you apply your sine wave the flux is centered at 950 mT with +/- 100 mT, but because the saturation flux is 1000 mT it will be clipped. So you have some kind of asymmetric behavior here.
This could, as i already explained some days ago, also have the effect of 'magnetic rectification' which might explain some of the strange effects.
Hi Skywatcher,
I also say the saturation is surely involved and the nonlinear behavior of the toroidal core with the magnet attached makes understanding much harder.
Traditional toroidal ferrit cores normally has a 0.4-0.5T saturation limit, modern cores obviously better with 1-1.5T limits.
However, I do not think everything is to be blamed by saturation. See Luc first picture in his reply here:
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=8892.msg235414#msg235414
The voltage should show a nice sinewave but its upper positive half is narrower than the lower one. And this core did not have any magnets attached: the distortion must have come from the lack of the optimal bias for the MOSFET to work on its linear transfer line, it acted as a switch.
But the distortion is more pronounced for the core with the magnet in his bottom picture there, using the same switching condition and I suspect the resonant impedance of the coil is also higher-- another reason for getting distortion in the output signal. This may turn out when Luc can test the coils without the MOSFET.
rgds, Gyula
Quote from: void109 on March 30, 2010, 01:32:55 PM
I hope this doesn't seem unrelated, but I'm working with Luc's setup and trying variations to which this applies.
I worked out a circuit to get an AC square wave pulse to drive my parallel resonant circuit for the coil, however, it ends up with:
555 timer x 1
p-mos x 1
n-mos x 5
I spent quite some time foraging through google before I came up with this solution - however it seems ungainly (a lot of components! I'm new to electronics in general) - does anyone know of an easier way to turn a 12V source into an AC square wave?
You can view the circuit at
http://www.falstad.com/circuit/
And then import the schematic I'm attaching to this post.
Also, I appreciate all of the work that's being shared here, I know I haven't posted much, but I try to refrain unless I have something new and or original to say. Most of what I'm seeing others are seeing and posting in more than sufficient detail to warrant a post from myself :D Thanks all
Hey Void
Good job. I had talked about this effect a while back with this sim. I wonder if it is an artifact with the sim. But it is exciting to see it go.
Thanks
Mags
Quote from: NextGen67 on March 31, 2010, 02:39:15 AM
Hi Gyula,
Well, the standard formula to calculate L,C or F cannot predict C on it's own.
My point is, that it must be somehow possible to get a quite close estimation by using data from the data sheet of the particular mosfet, to -on beforehand- determine what it's 'final' Capacitance 'result' would be when being plugged into Luc's A.
The 1578.54 pF is derived from the 5 to 50 Khz scope shots Luc provided... If you put his main coil mH and the belonging frequency for each scope shot in the online LC calculator, you will see that all scope shot frequency's/mH's come to between 1533 and 1580 pF
So if we can get a good estimation of this C value, we might in the first place get a better understanding between Ciss, Coss, Crss, Rds(on), Vgs(th) and Vgs, wrt the A, and by such we would be able to find the 'perfecft' match mosfet.
In the 2nd place, it *might* be such, that for optimizing the A to 100 percent [well as close to it as possible], we need to know the mosfets C value to begin with, meaning the A would be fine tune designed around that value.
My values by the way might differ slightly from online type calculators, as I do calculations the old fashion way ;) .
--
NextGen67
@NextGen
I put in
bold your text above and I ask you WHY do you use the resonance formula as you described for calculating something which is NOT in resonance?
Because at the drain side there is NO resonance ok? There IS resonance in the gate source circuit where the sinusoidal voltage is shown.
Question is why Luc had to tune the main toroid core/coil with the magnet?
I think that for each individual frequency for the oscillator to work properly (and on 'properly' now I mean Luc's quest for the lowest uA draw), the drain circuit's reactive impedance has to be trimmed so that for each frequency the phase shift and the voltage amplitude BE optimal for feedback to control the gate. And the 'optimal' means the positive gate voltage peaks in time fall just between the drain voltage pulses, not earlier or not later AND then the fedback amplitude is such that it matches the MOSFET's threshold voltage level. In this respect the Q of the input side coil that is tuned by a ferrite rod is also to be watched for, maybe the coil Luc used there with its high DC resistance had a just optimum value for the job, it would also be good to test with a better Q coil.
At the gate source side the MOSFET input capacitance C
iss is surely can be calculated from the measured frequency and ferrite rod coil inductances. I did some calculation in this respect, using an online LC resonance calculator. Let the coil between the gate source is Lg.
f[kHz] 5.58 8 12 16 20 25 30 40 50
Lg[mH] 310 147 65.3 38.7 25.3 16.3 11.7 7.3 4.9
C
iss[pF] 2624 2692 2693 2556 2502 2486 2405 2168 2067
I am not sure that with all these info as I see this oscillator there is something useful to be drawn into a formula but who knows?
rgds, Gyula
Quote from: gyulasun on March 31, 2010, 06:27:09 AM
Hi Luc,
Thank you for the test. I asked it because normally at such low audio frequencies toroidal cores give higher Q at a few kHz higher frequency (6kHz --> 8kHz) and, besides, higher frequency involves higher inductive reactance too (in the inductive reactance formula the reactance linearly increases with the frequency, (XL=2*pi*f*L), so does the resonant impedance, Z=Q*XL.
And if the resonant impedance is higher at a higher frequency wrt a lower frequency, the MOSFET will draw less current at its drain side when switches ON, this is the same as if you were using a ,say, a 50 kOhm resistor in the drain (instead of the coil) at 6kHz and then you were using ,say, a 70 kOhm resistor at 8.3kHz: obviously the the current draw would be less in the latter case.
And your split wound coil definitely must have a lower self capacitance with respect to the normally wound coil, I estimated the 533pF as being a close match to reality: your split wound coil may have 533pF LESS self capacitance than the normally wound.
This means that if you split the coil into ,say, four parts (for four quarters) you surely will have a coil with even less self capacitance. However, I can only GUESS whether the inductance in this case increases four times instead of the double value, maybe yes.
I think it also would be useful to test the two coils (the ones you kindly tested for me yesterday) in the following way: please see Diagram 4 in this link: http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/experiment/lab/expt3/expt3.html
You could use the same C capacitor for both coils in parallel, its value could be anything between 1000 and 1200pF what you can find and combine, at 6kHz the 635mH coils should resonate with 1108pF. The R resistor in the Diagram shows your coils DC resistance, no need for putting there anything.
It is possible you would have to use 470kOhm or even 1MegaOhm series resistor instead of the 100kOhm shown because the resonant impedances received from toroid coils should be in the several hundred kOHm range.
PLEASE use your Fluke voltage meter in AC to see the voltage Vout at the output , I do not know your Fluke AC input impedance (maybe 1MegaOhm with 20-50pF parallel capacitance, just use a 1-2pF series coupling capacitor at the Vout output to reduce any detuning and loading effect to a minimum. USE the SINE wave setting on the gen (but if you curious, switch to square wave too :) )
You would first search for the resonant maximum output voltage, starting with the normally wound, no magnet coil, paralled with the 10..pF cap. Try to adjust with the signal level control just 10V RMS at the resonant maxed output (input level actually not important now, only the output from the resonant circuit). The reason why I ask the 10V RMS output at resonance is shown here:
http://www.allaboutcircuits.com/vol_2/chpt_6/6.html#22055.png
Now if you detune the signal gen first to a lower frequency so that the output voltage changes gradually from 10V to 7.07V RMS, you notice this frequency, ok? It is possible you need to use a digital frequency meter to better read this lower frequency, if your dial on the generator is rather rough for finer tens or hundreds Hz details. Please tune also to an upper frequency where the output voltage also reduces gradually to 7.07 RMS, and notice this frequency too.
Now if you substract the lower freq (say it is 5.8kHz) from the higher freq (say it is 6.2kHz), the difference is 6.2-5.8= .4kHz The Q value is received if you divide the resonant frequency (say it was exactly 6kHz) with the difference: Q=6/.4=15 it is much possible your toroidal coils will have a much narrower 3dB bandwidth, it means the Q values will be higher, this is why a digital frequncy meter is a neccessity when you detune to the half power points on the resonace curve.
This way we could have a much better inside onto the two different coils, regarding their Q, resonant impedance and self capacitance. And this test setup creates a different circuit 'enviroment' for the coils, namely no nonlinear dynamic MOSFET capacitance.
If you do not understand anything wrt to this test, please ask.
rgds, Gyula
Hi Guyla,
I don't have a frequency counter but I think I have a software that uses a computer sound card to do it. Do you think that would be good enough?
The other thing, can you tell me what doing this test will prove or disprove as I'm not even sure I understood the previous test of adding the capacitance proved.
Thanks
Luc
Quote from: gotoluc on March 30, 2010, 10:28:08 PM
I think it's time to wind a new toroid. I hate winding toroids :P
Me too. ;)
Have you ever considered using cores like this one ?
http://img.alibaba.com/photo/209803177/UF_Mn_Zn_ferrite_core_magnetic.jpg (http://img.alibaba.com/photo/209803177/UF_Mn_Zn_ferrite_core_magnetic.jpg)
I don't think the core has to be round. It only must be closed.
So a rectangular shaped core should do the job too.
Also the coil could be anywhere and it doesn't have to cover the whole core.
Anyway, making and exchanging coils would be very easy with a separable core.
Quote from: gotoluc on March 31, 2010, 11:31:16 AM
Hi Guyla,
I don't have a frequency counter but I think I have a software that uses a computer sound card to do it. Do you think that would be good enough?
The other thing, can you tell me what doing this test will prove or disprove as I'm not even sure I understood the previous test of adding the capacitance proved.
Thanks
Luc
Hi Luc,
Yes I think the software with the audio card would be fine, though you would have to attenuate the 10V RMS at the Fluke output to the audio card input so that it should not overload.
Just occured to me: what if you would use your scope for monitoring the 10V voltage also at the Fluke input and measure the frequency with it at the same time? Maybe the resolution will be enough (could it be increased in the scope software?).
By the way, the 10V RMS sounds too high if comparing it to the so far 'usual' 10-11V peak to peak voltages across these toroidal coils, of course you can reduce it to around 3-4V RMS instead, but then you have to multiply the actual max resonance voltage value by .707 to know the lower and upper amplitudes for detuning. (say you adjust 3.4V RMS, then 3.4*.707=2.4V so you detune from the peak to the left and to right side till the amplitude reduces to 2.4V from the 3.4V)
From this test
1) the unloaded Q quality factor for the split and normal wound coils can be learned.
2) it will turn out if so far the MOSFET caused the distortion in the sinewave or the core. You would wish to see beautiful sine waves from these resonant circuits, not distorted.
3) the self capacitance of the split wound coil could be checked again.
With this test I ahave no intention to prove or disprove anything.
Regarding the sense of the previous test I asked: Besides what I already wrote, I suspected that the resonant impedance of the split wound coil (with the magnet) has increased at 8.3kHz (where you found its resonance) with respect to the normal wound coil's 6kHz resonance and at this increased impedance the MOSFET may get "overdriven", I mean it cannot 'give' its output power to the load due the too high resonant impedance and it reflects back.
It is the same if you have an audio amplifier and you drive it normally and use a 4 Ohm loudspeaker, and it works ok. Then you replace the 4 Ohm with a 16 Ohm loudspeaker and drive it with the same power, you will probably hear distortion because the load impedance is not optimum any more, it is too high for taking up all the available output power, the amplifying device or devices inside the amplifier will "produce" distortion (unwanted frequencies) from the
reflected and not used up power and these may find their way back toward the power supply or elsewhere (and may cause harm in the active devices).
Something similar may happen in your case at the higher frequencies, of course at a much lower, just microWatt, power level. But I am not certain here whether this output 'reflection' really happens, it is a possibility.
Thanks, Gyula
Yes skywatcher,
I was thinking the same thing or cutting my toroid in half or just use the black sand I have to make my own with resin.
We shall see.
Luc
Luc,
But you have to insure the smooth mating surfaces to get the lowest airgap possible.
Cutting ferrite is difficult. It's very hard.
You need diamond or tungsten carbide tools to cut it, and in most cases the material will break apart from the vibrations.
Quote from: gyulasun on March 31, 2010, 04:17:25 PM
Hi Luc,
Yes I think the software with the audio card would be fine, though you would have to attenuate the 10V RMS at the Fluke output to the audio card input so that it should not overload.
Just occured to me: what if you would use your scope for monitoring the 10V voltage also at the Fluke input and measure the frequency with it at the same time? Maybe the resolution will be enough (could it be increased in the scope software?).
By the way, the 10V RMS sounds too high if comparing it to the so far 'usual' 10-11V peak to peak voltages across these toroidal coils, of course you can reduce it to around 3-4V RMS instead, but then you have to multiply the actual max resonance voltage value by .707 to know the lower and upper amplitudes for detuning. (say you adjust 3.4V RMS, then 3.4*.707=2.4V so you detune from the peak to the left and to right side till the amplitude reduces to 2.4V from the 3.4V)
From this test
1) the unloaded Q quality factor for the split and normal wound coils can be learned.
2) it will turn out if so far the MOSFET caused the distortion in the sinewave or the core. You would wish to see beautiful sine waves from these resonant circuits, not distorted.
3) the self capacitance of the split wound coil could be checked again.
With this test I ahave no intention to prove or disprove anything.
Regarding the sense of the previous test I asked: Besides what I already wrote, I suspected that the resonant impedance of the split wound coil (with the magnet) has increased at 8.3kHz (where you found its resonance) with respect to the normal wound coil's 6kHz resonance and at this increased impedance the MOSFET may get "overdriven", I mean it cannot 'give' its output power to the load due the too high resonant impedance and it reflects back.
It is the same if you have an audio amplifier and you drive it normally and use a 4 Ohm loudspeaker, and it works ok. Then you replace the 4 Ohm with a 16 Ohm loudspeaker and drive it with the same power, you will probably hear distortion because the load impedance is not optimum any more, it is too high for taking up all the available output power, the amplifying device or devices inside the amplifier will "produce" distortion (unwanted frequencies) from the reflected and not used up power and these may find their way back toward the power supply or elsewhere (and may cause harm in the active devices).
Something similar may happen in your case at the higher frequencies, of course at a much lower, just microWatt, power level. But I am not certain here whether this output 'reflection' really happens, it is a possibility.
Thanks, Gyula
Thanks Gyula for the additional information and explanation of what these tests are for.
Luc
Quote from: skywatcher on March 31, 2010, 04:23:46 PM
Cutting ferrite is difficult. It's very hard.
You need diamond or tungsten carbide tools to cut it, and in most cases the material will break apart from the vibrations.
Yes I agree! very difficult stuff to cut :P
Luc
By the way, i think the most optimal core would be a 'pot core' like this:
http://www.oppermann-electronic.de/assets/images/Bild2642.jpg (http://www.oppermann-electronic.de/assets/images/Bild2642.jpg)
http://www.jogis-roehrenbude.de/Bastelschule/RIM-Piccolo58-Spulensatz.jpg (http://www.jogis-roehrenbude.de/Bastelschule/RIM-Piccolo58-Spulensatz.jpg)
Such cores have the lowest losses, are also closed like a toroid, but even more closed ;) and the coil can be wound very easily because it's a normal coil, you can wind it with a drilling machine in one minute. The magnets can be placed on the outside.
I think i have some pot-cores somewhere, if i find them i will make some experiments...
Hi guys,
There's a 2.5 inch ferrite toroid core (Type W, 800 (medium) Permeability) for $5 at mouser.com and here's the link: 61mm exact size...
http://mouser.com/ProductDetail/Wurth-Electronics/74270097/?qs=5twSNpOB8IC3x1MNWE5eDg%3d%3d
There's also high permeability (slightly more expensive) here:
http://www.cwsbytemark.com/
e
Quote from: skywatcher on March 31, 2010, 04:42:23 PM
By the way, i think the most optimal core would be a 'pot core' like this:
...
Such cores have the lowest losses, are also closed like a toroid, but even
more closed ;) and the coil can be wound very easily because it's a normal
coil, you can wind it with a drilling machine in one minute. The magnets can
be placed on the outside.
...
@skywatcher;
I like this idea, not only is the toroid on all sides...External interference
can't make it's way inside...nice for applying to a working overunity
circuit for finding whether excess energy comes from outside or inside
the toroid core material.
---
BTW, If you get a "Red X" when you click on skywatchers second
link above - cut and paste the link into your browser to see the
picture?...anomalous+bogus.
:S:MarkSCoffman
Hi everyone,
NextGen67 suggested a test to which I had not done yet.
He suggested I test the single winding toroid with a magnet but dropping the inductance to half and also do the same with the dual coil toroid.
To my surprise both torois resonated at the same frequency.
So I decided to try them at quarter inductance and eighth inductance. Again they are very close.
Seeing these results I would now say that it is indeed the magnet that was causing the large difference in resonating frequency between the two toroids when tested one with magnet and the other without.
This could be easily explain:
The magnet causes a compression on the toroid, which could be like adding a bungee to a swing and the other one nothing. They will have a different resonating frequency. As you can see in the scope shots below, the more magnet flux is applied (stronger bungee) the higher the resonating frequency is. However, keep in mind that we are also lowering the inductance value which is the main reason of the increase in resonating frequency. The differences that I'm referring to is the 2KHz difference between resonating frequency of the two toroids tested (one with magnet and the other without). This is clear to me now and I hope it is for everyone else! since when the magnet is on both they become quite similar.
All tests are using 12.86vdc and IRF640 as switch, triggered by signal generator and tuned to send most current back to source. The green scope probe is between drain and source and yellow probe is between gate and source.
In this post I attached the two shots with magnet to drop inductance to half.
Notice the bonus of extra magnet flux but also with the extra inductance of the dual coil
Luc
First shot is of dual coil toroid at half H returning -8uA and next is single coil toroid at half H returning -7uA
First shot is of dual coil toroid at quarter H returning -22uA and next is single coil toroid at quarter H returning -14uA
First shot is of dual coil toroid at eighth H returning -39uA and next is single coil toroid at eighth H returning -27uA
Quote from: MasterPlaster on March 15, 2010, 06:55:12 AM
This is a very informative video on magnetic transfer.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mLd_py1xTO8
Thanks for posting that video
I had missed that one...
I was planning on making one of those for transfering power back to source from a bedini
I disagree with one thing in the video he says that to release the charge you you to remove the bar .........a coil wound around the bar and kept open until needed should not interfear with the charging.
I was planning on feeding pulsed from several coils around a bedini into a large coil like in the video
Then have one bedini coil fed to the extra winding on the top bar.....this winding would have to be in opposition to the flow of the flux .......it should disrupt the flux just long enough to pulse your source battery.
It would be a low loss pulse battery ......
gary
Quote from: gotoluc on March 31, 2010, 10:57:49 PM
First shot is of dual coil toroid at eighth H returning -39uA and next is single coil toroid at eighth H returning -27uA
Hi Luc,
It is very interesting the negativ current draw increases as you go higher in frequency.
This is a very unusual measurement result so that if you do not mind I would like to suggest some simple measuring methods to make sure whether we can really trust in the negative polarity sign you experience. Please postpone what I asked yesterday for testing (Q measurement of the toroidal cores).
Would you use your last setup again where you were at 17.36-18.12kHz frequency already and the currents were -39 and -27uA.
Alternative measurement suggestions for testing the polarity change:
#1 If you happen to have a 100uA or 1mA analog meter or an analog multimeter that has DC mA measuring range that would be the best. You would connect such an analog meter in series with the battery positive pole.
(On certain analog multimeters the most sensitive volt or amper range is the analog meter itself with its 50-100uA basic sensitivity.)
#2 If you do not have an analog meter at hand, you may use a digital multimeter that has a 2mA DC measuring range (most sensitive in general, some may have 200uA DC range as well) and also connect such DMM in series with the positive battery pole. (positive input of the current meter goes to the positive pole of the battery)
#3 If you have a DMM that has 200uV DC input voltage measurement range (very rare and such DMMs are expensive), then please place its input in parallel with the 10 Ohm (you may remove the wires going towards the Fluke, no need for them for that moment). (positive input of the DMM goes to the positive pole of the battery, the negative input goes to the 10 Ohm resistor leg that continues towards the toroidal coil)
It is NOT interesting what the current amplitudes really measured with these alternative methods, it is the polarity check that would count.
I believe that unusual results should be checked manyfold to exclude any possibility for errors. I want to help in this effort.
rgds, Gyula
We've only been using one end of the magnet. The other end isn't being used
as shown by "Configuration A", in the below image. "Configuration B" is using
both ends of the magnet by using two toroids. "Configuration C1" is showing
2 gapped toroids for illustrative purposes only. "Configuration C2" is showing the
same 2 gapped toroids in "C1" overlapping each other to make a Figure 8, with a
magnet connecting the two. "Configuration B and C" could be using a dual coil for
both toroids, or a combination of dual and single coils.
GB
Here's a patent based on "Configuration B", http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=downloads;sa=downfile&id=378
Lee Valstad coil based on "Configuration C2" in my previous post forming a figure 8,
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Article:Magnetic_monopole_-_new_experiment_corroborates_Quantum_Ring_Theory#Valstad_Coil
GB
Quote from: gyulasun on April 01, 2010, 08:37:34 AM
Hi Luc,
It is very interesting the negativ current draw increases as you go higher in frequency.
This is a very unusual measurement result so that if you do not mind I would like to suggest some simple measuring methods to make sure whether we can really trust in the negative polarity sign you experience. Please postpone what I asked yesterday for testing (Q measurement of the toroidal cores).
Would you use your last setup again where you were at 17.36-18.12kHz frequency already and the currents were -39 and -27uA.
Alternative measurement suggestions for testing the polarity change:
#1 If you happen to have a 100uA or 1mA analog meter or an analog multimeter that has DC mA measuring range that would be the best. You would connect such an analog meter in series with the battery positive pole.
(On certain analog multimeters the most sensitive volt or amper range is the analog meter itself with its 50-100uA basic sensitivity.)
#2 If you do not have an analog meter at hand, you may use a digital multimeter that has a 2mA DC measuring range (most sensitive in general, some may have 200uA DC range as well) and also connect such DMM in series with the positive battery pole. (positive input of the current meter goes to the positive pole of the battery)
#3 If you have a DMM that has 200uV DC input voltage measurement range (very rare and such DMMs are expensive), then please place its input in parallel with the 10 Ohm (you may remove the wires going towards the Fluke, no need for them for that moment). (positive input of the DMM goes to the positive pole of the battery, the negative input goes to the 10 Ohm resistor leg that continues towards the toroidal coil)
It is NOT interesting what the current amplitudes really measured with these alternative methods, it is the polarity check that would count.
I believe that unusual results should be checked manyfold to exclude any possibility for errors. I want to help in this effort.
rgds, Gyula
Hi Gyula,
I don't have an analogue meter. So I did the test you asked using a good quality DMM that has a DC 000.0uA resolution to measure the the amp and I used my Schlumberger 7150 plus to measure the voltage across the 10 Ohm resistor. It has a DC volt resolution of .000000dcv
The results are Minus -003.3uA on the current meter and Minus -.000337dcv on the voltage meter.
I don't quite understand why you want me to do this test since this is the exact setup of my capacitor bank meter (measuring the voltage across a 10 Ohm resistor using my hi resolution meter)... but maybe you didn't understand that. Anyways, I did the setup as you asked to satisfy your request or remove any possible connection error.
Luc
ADDEDSomething is not right with this test If I use the current meter at the same time as the voltage across the 10 Ohm resistor as this is not giving a true current reading. Did you want each test to be separate?
ADDEDOkay, maybe this is what you want. The current meter is in series between the battery + and the resistor. So current meter red lead is connected to + of battery and the black lead is connected to the resistor. The voltage meter red lead is connected with the black lead of the current meter side of the resistor and the black lead is connected to the coil side of the resistor.
Results: -244.5uA on current meter and -.000244vdc on voltage meter
I think this is what you want ;)
Luc
Quote from: gotoluc on April 01, 2010, 11:38:05 AM
Hi Gyula,
I don't have an analogue meter. So I did the test you asked using a good quality DMM that has a DC 000.0uA resolution to measure the the amp and I used my Schlumberger 7150 plus to measure the voltage across the 10 Ohm resistor. It has a DC volt resolution of .000000dcv
The results are Minus -003.3uA on the current meter and Minus -.000337dcv on the voltage meter.
I don't quite understand why you want me to do this test since this is the exact setup of my capacitor bank meter (measuring the voltage across a 10 Ohm resistor using my hi resolution meter)... but maybe you didn't understand that. Anyways, I did the setup as you asked to satisfy your request or remove any possible connection error.
Luc
ADDED
Something is not right with this test If I use the current meter at the same time as the voltage across the 10 Ohm resistor as this is not giving a true current reading. Did you want each test to be separate?
ADDED
Okay, maybe this is what you want. The current meter is in series between the battery + and the resistor. So current meter red lead is connected to + of battery and the black lead is connected to the resistor. The voltage meter red lead is connected with the black lead of the current meter side of the resistor and the black lead is connected to the coil side of the resistor.
Results: -244.5uA on current meter and -.000244vdc on voltage meter
I think this is what you want ;)
Luc
Hi Luc,
Thanks for all the tests, I am even more puzzled now... and this is not a complaint of course :) :-\
Basically I meant to get rid of the hi res Fluke microvolt meter because I suspected its ground sees the computer grnd and the signal gen grnd and at the same time it has to measure a few microvolts amplitude floating on 12V DC while the pulses has an increasing frequency: this may challange its common mode behavior and the sampling process inside it may suffer.
Well this is not case, so for the time being I have no explanation (of my own) for the negative polarity...
Thanks, Gyula
Quote from: gyulasun on April 01, 2010, 12:47:01 PM
Hi Luc,
Thanks for all the tests, I am even more puzzled now... and this is not a complaint of course :) :-\
Basically I meant to get rid of the hi res Fluke microvolt meter because I suspected its ground sees the computer grnd and the signal gen grnd and at the same time it has to measure a few microvolts amplitude floating on 12V DC while the pulses has an increasing frequency: this may challange its common mode behavior and the sampling process inside it may suffer.
Well this is not case, so for the time being I have no explanation (of my own) for the negative polarity...
Thanks, Gyula
Okay Gyula I understand.
I have tested ground loop possibility before and found none.
However, just to make sure again I connected the high resolution volt meter to an inverter so it is powered by 12vdc (no ground possibility) and the current meter I used is a battery operated one so that's not a problem. There is no Oscilloscope probes connected either, so that's not a problem. The circuit is running from one 12vdc battery and a separate 12vdc battery is used for the inverter to power the volt meter.
Still with all this the results are identical as I posted.
I think it maybe time you consider this as a true gain of current when the magnet is applied and resonance is achieved.
Let me know if there is anything we could of missed.
Luc
Luc,
Then a logical step would be to go up in the resonant frequency in this setup, this means to lower the inductance further down with stronger magnet(s), right?
What if you replace the 12V battery with a capacitor, charged up first to the same 12.7V? If current flows back then the cap voltage should very very slowly increase (depending on self discharge inner dissipation).
Gyula
Quote from: gyulasun on April 01, 2010, 01:50:31 PM
Luc,
Then a logical step would be to go up in the resonant frequency in this setup, this means to lower the inductance further down with stronger magnet(s), right?
What if you replace the 12V battery with a capacitor, charged up first to the same 12.7V? If current flows back then the cap voltage should very very slowly increase (depending on self discharge inner dissipation).
Gyula
This is what I have been doing ever since I started this topic Gyula.
No battery is connected and the cap bank charges up.
Luc
Quote from: gotoluc on April 01, 2010, 02:45:20 PM
This is what I have been doing ever since I started this topic Gyula.
No battery is connected and the cap bank charges up.
Luc
very nice.
Hi all, I did some tests based on some comments in this thread to satisfy my own curiousity. Dont know if its useful or not, but here are the results.
Core: Metglas 2714A 2510P4AF Flat Loop 25mmx19mmx10mm flat loop
Magnet wire - 22 guage
BK 878A LCR Meter
4 turn wire - 12"
2 turn wire - 6"
1 turn wire - 3"
Data is at: http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=twYJTFuWUrRAMMzos--b_LQ&output=html
I dont know if there's anything useful in there yet - I was just recording data. One thing I saw was the discrepency between the 2 CCW + 2CCW series and the single 4 CW - I wound those setups twice to verify that it was different.
Quote from: void109 on April 01, 2010, 03:54:05 PM
Hi all, I did some tests based on some comments in this thread to satisfy my own curiousity. Dont know if its useful or not, but here are the results.
Core: Metglas 2714A 2510P4AF Flat Loop 25mmx19mmx10mm flat loop
Magnet wire - 22 guage
BK 878A LCR Meter
4 turn wire - 12"
2 turn wire - 6"
1 turn wire - 3"
Data is at: http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=twYJTFuWUrRAMMzos--b_LQ&output=html
I dont know if there's anything useful in there yet - I was just recording data. One thing I saw was the discrepency between the 2 CCW + 2CCW series and the single 4 CW - I wound those setups twice to verify that it was different.
Hi void109,
thanks for doing these tests. I would guess that the 2CCW 2CCW Series 1094uH result would be the way my coil is done.
It would be of great service if you can try the following idea.
Someone asked me, if 2 coil section wound and connected the correct way (in series) will double the inductance, will 4 or more coil section quadruple or more the inductance.
Can you do a test to verify this, as it would be of great help to all replicators.
I'm not sure how the 4 sections would be connected to get highest value, so you may have to try many combination's to figure it out.
Please let us know what you come up with.
Thanks again for sharing all this great data with us.
Luc
Quote from: gotoluc on April 01, 2010, 02:45:20 PM
This is what I have been doing ever since I started this topic Gyula.
No battery is connected and the cap bank charges up.
Luc
Sorry Luc, I have lost in the circuit and measurement details so much that I forgot about the overall history...
Gyula
Quote from: gyulasun on April 01, 2010, 05:50:28 PM
Sorry Luc, I have lost in the circuit and measurement details so much that I forgot about the overall history...
Gyula
No problem Gyula ;)
I do appreciate all your test suggestions as I would hate to overlook something obvious.
This makes me feel better that someone with so much more EE knowledge than me cannot see something that has been overlooked.
I'll keep developing it and posting the results.
Thanks again for your assistance :)
Luc
Quote from: Bruce_TPU on February 27, 2010, 02:39:32 AM
Hey Mags,
I am still going to try...but, I have now reduced my input power from 2 amps using one toroid, to having 4 toroids in series and a 100 ohm resistor on the battery lead. Amps are reduced to .070... ;)
The idea, I am thinking, will be to wire in series as many toroids as possible, all the same cores, and windings. Wrap with just enough windings to oscillate the magnet. The MORE toroids in series, the LESS power used...why? Because the toroid DOES NOT SEE THE LOAD, because the power is being generated by oscillating a magnetic field. Yes, more amps make it to oscillate better, but having the proper core, with powerful magnet inside, should more than make up for it. I will add up my output power tomorow and see where I stand. But, hehehe, I simply need to keep adding toroids and remove the 100 Ohm resistor.
Cheers,
Bruce
The above is a quote from Bruce in another thread. He says, having more toroids in series, lowers the input power. If we connect two toroids in series, and used both ends of the magnet between each toroid in a figure 8 or an overlapping figure 8 configuration, then we may have an increase in performance, as compared to a single toroid where only one end of the magnet is being used. The unused end of the magnet with a single toroid can bias another toroid at no cost, let's use it.
I'm just trying to throw out ideas to improve upon what Luc has already done. It's not changing his system, other than utilizing what isn't currently being used. Let's exploit the system to it's fullest potential possible.
GB
Quote from: gravityblock on April 01, 2010, 11:08:49 PM
The above is a quote from Bruce in another thread. He says, having more toroids in series, lowers the input power. If we connect two toroids in series, and used both ends of the magnet between each toroid in a figure 8 or an overlapping figure 8 configuration, then we may have an increase in performance, as compared to a single toroid where only one end of the magnet is being used. The unused end of the magnet with a single toroid can bias another toroid at no cost, let's use it.
I'm just trying to throw out ideas to improve upon what Luc has already done. It's not changing his system, other than utilizing what isn't currently being used. Let's exploit the system to it's fullest potential possible.
GB
Hi GB,
I agree with you!... the dual toroid idea sounds good.
Please note that adding toriod's in series is also a way of increasing inductance. I'm starting to think that maybe a high enough inductance coil on a ferrite core toroid at resonance may return some energy even without adding magnets.
Many things to test ;)
Luc
@gotoluc
Are you tempted to add two thicker coils of a few turns each over the existing coils. This way you can measure any output on them while in resonance compared to slightly off resonance. You can do the same to your one wind coil and compare output results. If both are the same output, then we can scratch our heads even more. One would assume that more inductance means more field but does it mean more output.
@Luc,
No rush on the dual toroid config. Work at your on pace. There is a lot of testing to be done. Just keep those ideas in the back of your mind, until your ready to cross that road, especially for an asymmetry system. I've noticed the Steorn camp is using two different frequencies, duty cycles, etc in their ssOrbo.......probably to create an asymmetric system.
Around the 57 second mark of this Steorn video, announcing the ssOrbo, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=evIZy72uCRc , it shows software setup to handle two different frequencies, two different duty cycles, etc. ClanZer's ssOrbo replication is also showing this same setup, http://www.overunity.org.uk/CLaNZSSpanel.jpg This is more than likely used to create an asymmetric system.
This document recently released from Steorn, http://www.steorn.com/images/asymmetry-and-energy-in-magnetic-systems.pdf , sets out to demonstrate that such asymmetry in itself does not lead to unexpected energy results, but that a combination of asymmetry and non-linear MH relationships does indeed lead to unexpected energy results.
I think we need to make it an asymmetric system, or drive it into a parametric resonance state. We're already working on the non-linear MH curve by placing the magnet on the toroid, so I don't think we need to worry about this, other than finding the best position. Maybe the dual coil is, or could be used to create an asymmetric system with very little modification of the circuit.
GB
Quote from: gravityblock on April 02, 2010, 02:29:08 AM
@Luc,
No rush on the dual toroid config. Work at your on pace. There is a lot of testing to be done. Just keep those ideas in the back of your mind, until your ready to cross that road, especially for an asymmetry system. I've noticed the Steorn camp is using two different frequencies, duty cycles, etc in their ssOrbo.......probably to create an asymmetric system.
Around the 57 second mark of this Steorn video, announcing the ssOrbo, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=evIZy72uCRc , it shows software setup to handle two different frequencies, two different duty cycles, etc. ClanZer's ssOrbo replication is also showing this same setup, http://www.overunity.org.uk/CLaNZSSpanel.jpg This is more than likely used to create an asymmetric system.
This document recently released from Steorn, http://www.steorn.com/images/asymmetry-and-energy-in-magnetic-systems.pdf , sets out to demonstrate that such asymmetry in itself does not lead to unexpected energy results, but that a combination of asymmetry and non-linear MH relationships does indeed lead to unexpected energy results.
I think we need to make it an asymmetric system, or drive it into a parametric resonance state. We're already working on the non-linear MH curve by placing the magnet on the toroid, so I don't think we need to worry about this, other than finding the best position. Maybe the dual coil is, or could be used to create an asymmetric system with very little modification of the circuit.
GB
Yes, the introduction of a second signal into the resonating circuit is key. Here is a link to a video(rather old) that mentions exactly that. He is talking about a solid state N-Machine http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X0L9rq87n3w#t=5m20s (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X0L9rq87n3w#t=5m20s)
Most intriguing that ssOrbo is also a multi frequency device. Can it really be this simple? Sure hope so, either way 2010 is shaping up as a banner year for OU research.
Quote from: redninja on April 02, 2010, 04:19:58 AM
Yes, the introduction of a second signal into the resonating circuit is key. Here is a link to a video(rather old) that mentions exactly that. He is talking about a solid state N-Machine http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X0L9rq87n3w#t=5m20s (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X0L9rq87n3w#t=5m20s)
Most intriguing that ssOrbo is also a multi frequency device. Can it really be this simple? Sure hope so, either way 2010 is shaping up as a banner year for OU research.
Video .... Thanks !
Could i use this hardware as a signal/frequency generator ?
http://maplin.co.uk/Module.aspx?ModuleNo=220045
Thanks.
Quote from: DeepCut on April 02, 2010, 08:42:09 AM
Could i use this hardware as a signal/frequency generator ?
http://maplin.co.uk/Module.aspx?ModuleNo=220045
Thanks.
@Deepcut
Its frequency range looks proper. You are going to need a voltage divider
"level control" potentiometer. The output signals may be zero to +5vdc. If you need +/-2.5Vpp use a 2uf or larger non-electrolytic dc blocking cap in series with it's output. In a signal generator the signal will always be +/-centered about ground. The transistor side injects it's own dc bias onto
the signal.
:S:MarkCoffman
OK will-do thanks for that.
Quote from: wattsup on April 02, 2010, 12:35:13 AM
@gotoluc
Are you tempted to add two thicker coils of a few turns each over the existing coils. This way you can measure any output on them while in resonance compared to slightly off resonance. You can do the same to your one wind coil and compare output results. If both are the same output, then we can scratch our heads even more. One would assume that more inductance means more field but does it mean more output.
That is a good idea wattsup ;)... the only thing with that is at frequencies the two coils may to resonate on harmonics and give a higher output which may not be a true linear output test.
I always liked the idea Magluvin had to wind an output coil at 90 degrees of the pulsed coil. This shows more the return flux energy since it can only picks up when the main coil is switched off since the cores magnetic flux does not care of the angle the pickup coil wire is at.
Luc
Quote from: gravityblock on April 02, 2010, 02:29:08 AM
@Luc,
I think we need to make it an asymmetric system, or drive it into a parametric resonance state. We're already working on the non-linear MH curve by placing the magnet on the toroid, so I don't think we need to worry about this, other than finding the best position. Maybe the dual coil is, or could be used to create an asymmetric system with very little modification of the circuit.
GB
Thanks GB for bringing this point in.
I also agree! if it has value it could be done without too much difficulty.
Thanks for sharing this.
Luc
Quote from: redninja on April 02, 2010, 04:19:58 AM
Yes, the introduction of a second signal into the resonating circuit is key. Here is a link to a video(rather old) that mentions exactly that. He is talking about a solid state N-Machine http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X0L9rq87n3w#t=5m20s (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X0L9rq87n3w#t=5m20s)
Most intriguing that ssOrbo is also a multi frequency device. Can it really be this simple? Sure hope so, either way 2010 is shaping up as a banner year for OU research.
Thanks redninja for sharing this video.
I wonder what he is talking about that it is front page new in India that they will be energy independent? anyone here know what he is referring to?
Luc
Hello! I Gotoluc , propose to see this video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SjDbIrKIVXs&feature=related
Quote from: djeri on April 02, 2010, 04:12:03 PM
Hello! I Gotoluc , propose to see this video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SjDbIrKIVXs&feature=related
Hi djeri,
thanks for your post :)
Many of us here are aware of Jean-Louis Naudin experiments.
Please note that this is not free energy as he is putting in the main coil much more current then he is getting out. I do agree with Jean-Louis Naudin that the energy picked up by the secondary coil is from the return flux of the permanent magnets to the core.
Back in January I made this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y3_vr8VIdpE
It's a replication of user Magluvin's ferrite core toroid with primary and secondary coil that are wound at 90 degrees of each other. Once the primary coil is shut off the permanent magnet flux returns to the core and this is what is picked up by the secondary coil. I saw that back then, so it is not new to me what JLN is doing now.
One of the many differences here is, we are bringing the main coil to resonance, which makes it much more efficient in current it uses.
From my best test to date the main coil can resonating at 12 KHz and feed its own pulse circuit at the same time and only use about 10 mirco Amps at 3vdc.
I do not know of any pulse circuit in the world that can
just operate the gate let alone the main coil of a IRF640 mosfet with this low a current using 3vdc at 12KHz. If someone knows of one please post the circuit and the factual test data.
We are far from our goal but I am hopeful we can find ways we can further increase the input voltage without increasing the current too much and maybe we can get some usable current from the device.
Hopefully with more development we may get it to produce more current out then what is going in. That is the goal.
At this time, this is the main difference between what we are doing here and Jean-Louis Naudin research work.
Luc
Edition All Hello! Thanks for the detailed description of LUC
Gotoluc,
I am trying to calculate the number of turns on your core given the inductance. To do this accurately I need some more information about the core parameters. The turns can be given by this equation:
N = number of turns
Al = nominal inductance
L = inductance of toroid in mH
N = 1000*sqrt(L/Al)
When I calculate this with a core of mine that that has inductance of your core (1050 mH) has permeability=850 and Al = 1000 I get 1026 turns. Can you give some more details about your core like the dimensions, permeability, and most importantly nominal inductance. The Al is almost always given when you buy a core.
I am excited about this because it may be the first public motionless research platform for ferroresonance. Having a motionless device to study is important because it allows us to reduce the variables that have been stopping all of us from isolating this phenomenon.
Thanks,
Chad.
Quote from: chadj on April 04, 2010, 06:09:49 PM
Gotoluc,
I am trying to calculate the number of turns on your core given the inductance. To do this accurately I need some more information about the core parameters. The turns can be given by this equation:
N = number of turns
Al = nominal inductance
L = inductance of toroid in mH
N = 1000*sqrt(L/Al)
When I calculate this with a core of mine that that has inductance of your core (1050 mH) has permeability=850 and Al = 1000 I get 1026 turns. Can you give some more details about your core like the dimensions, permeability, and most importantly nominal inductance. The Al is almost always given when you buy a core.
I am excited about this because it may be the first public motionless research platform for ferroresonance. Having a motionless device to study is important because it allows us to reduce the variables that have been stopping all of us from isolating this phenomenon.
Thanks,
Chad.
Hi Chad,
thanks for your interest. I calculate a total of around 800 turns or less are on the dual coil Toroid.
To make one turn of wire around these ferrite cores using the AWG 30 or 0.27mm wire used to make this toroid coil takes 35mm of wire length (on first layer) for each turn.
I have no information on the ferrite cores as they were a lot purchase (different sizes) on ebay with no details.
Hope the above help you to find the core specs.
Luc
Gotoluc,
Based on the information you gave me I was able to estimate the core permeability.
L=1050 (inductance in mH)
cw=3.5 (circumference of winding in cm)
N=800 (number of turns)
le=7.2 (my estimate of average circumference of toroid in cm)
Ae=((cw)^2)/(4*pi)=0.975 (area of toroid cross section in cm^2)
Al=(L*10^6)/(N^2)=1641 (nominal inductance L in mH)
finally...
permeability=(Al*le)/(4*pi*Ae)=967
The accuracy of this depends largely on the accuracy of the input values that are just approximations. Considering the permeability and appearance of your toroid I am guessing it is a NiZn ferrite.
I have wound quite a few cores in my time and know how hard it is. I cringe at the thought of winding 800 turns. There are machines that can quickly wind toroids and with this information you can place an order with a winding company (that's what I am doing).
Thanks,
Chad.
Hi Chad and Luc,
Recently I have come across a very good (and freeware) software on calculating toroidal coils inductances for any core. See here the mini Ring Core Calculator 1.2:
http://www.dl5swb.de/html/software_for_amateur_radio.htm
It can be used not only for known cores (where you know AL or u permeability but for complitely unknown cores. But this latter requires the unknown cores outside OD inside ID and height sizes and also a certain number of test turns what you can measure with your inductance meter.
Then the software uses these data in its Tools feature to calculate the relationship between AL and u permeability and imports that for further calculations. A very useful program.
So if Luc posts the OD, ID and height for the toroidal cores in question we can learn the core permeability pretty precisely. (MAybe Luc already posted the core sizes I have no time to wade through the thread.)
rgds, Gyula
Quote from: chadj on April 05, 2010, 01:49:52 AM
Gotoluc,
Based on the information you gave me I was able to estimate the core permeability.
L=1050 (inductance in mH)
cw=3.5 (circumference of winding in cm)
N=800 (number of turns)
le=7.2 (my estimate of average circumference of toroid in cm)
Ae=((cw)^2)/(4*pi)=0.975 (area of toroid cross section in cm^2)
Al=(L*10^6)/(N^2)=1641 (nominal inductance L in mH)
finally...
permeability=(Al*le)/(4*pi*Ae)=967
The accuracy of this depends largely on the accuracy of the input values that are just approximations. Considering the permeability and appearance of your toroid I am guessing it is a NiZn ferrite.
I have wound quite a few cores in my time and know how hard it is. I cringe at the thought of winding 800 turns. There are machines that can quickly wind toroids and with this information you can place an order with a winding company (that's what I am doing).
Thanks,
Chad.
Thanks Chad for calculating the core permeability.
They most likely have a permeability of 1000 seeing your result.
I picked up a digital caliper and here are the exact measurements of the core. Opening diameter 0.814" or 20.67mm Outside diameter 1.358" or 34.5mm Maximum height point is 0.465" or 11.82mm Minimum height of rounded sides is 0.375" or 9.53mm Width is 0.27" or 6.87mm
Thanks for sharing
Luc
Quote from: gyulasun on April 05, 2010, 06:03:32 AM
Hi Chad and Luc,
Recently I have come across a very good (and freeware) software on calculating toroidal coils inductances for any core. See here the mini Ring Core Calculator 1.2:
http://www.dl5swb.de/html/software_for_amateur_radio.htm
It can be used not only for known cores (where you know AL or u permeability but for complitely unknown cores. But this latter requires the unknown cores outside OD inside ID and height sizes and also a certain number of test turns what you can measure with your inductance meter.
Then the software uses these data in its Tools feature to calculate the relationship between AL and u permeability and imports that for further calculations. A very useful program.
So if Luc posts the OD, ID and height for the toroidal cores in question we can learn the core permeability pretty precisely. (MAybe Luc already posted the core sizes I have no time to wade through the thread.)
rgds, Gyula
Thanks Gyula for the link to this toroid calculator software.
The core size is in the circuit diagram but I just picked up a digital caliper and here are the accurate measurements.
Opening diameter 0.814" or 20.67mm Outside diameter 1.358" or 34.5mm Maximum height point is 0.465" or 11.82mm Minimum height of rounded sides is 0.375" or 9.53mm Width is 0.27" or 6.87mm
Luc
Thank you Luc, and please one more data: a single layer of (any) number of turns gives ? uH or mH, I know somewhere it could be found too... :)
Thanks, Gyula
Quote from: gyulasun on April 05, 2010, 02:23:11 PM
Thank you Luc, and please one more data: a single layer of (any) number of turns gives ? uH or mH, I know somewhere it could be found too... :)
Thanks, Gyula
Okay Gyula,
I wound 12 turns (first layer) of the 30AWG or 0.25mm wire on the toroid core which takes 35mm of wire length per turn and that gives 187uH / 12 = 15.58uH per turn on first layer
Luc
Thank you Luc, now using your OD=34.5mm ID=20.67mm and (average)height=10.6mm
the software gave for AL=1298,61nH/N2
and for permeability it gave u=1195.7
Thanks, Gyula
At everyone,
I think I found something important that is preventing the circuit to show its full potential.
I decided to reproduce as close as I can the sine wave signal the self pulsing coil produces when connected between the gate and source of the mosfet. Using my Signal Generator in sine wave I matched the frequency and adjusted the output to the exact vpp the pulse coil produces. Once I had them matched up as best I can I pulled out the pulse coil and connected only the generator. To my surprise the current draws is exactly the same as when the Pulse coil is connected and self pulsing. I would of though it would use less current since the switching is now powered by the generator! However this is not the case and I also found something even more important.
See the first 2 scope shots below to see first the pulse coil (self pulse mode) shot and next the generator pulsing the circuit.
All tests are using the same 3vdc feed and IRF640 mosfet with same dual coil toroid @ 1075mH (no magnet)
Green scope probe is between mosfet drain and source and Yellow scope probe is between mosfet gate and source.
Why is this important!... because ever since I've been using the pulse coil I lost the ability to control the mosfet switch on timing. If you look at all the scope shots I posted before, when using the pulse coil you will see it has this delay. However if I use the generators I can adjust the on time timing.
So without changing the setup I only turned the micro frequency adjustment on the generator to make the mosfet turn on time sooner and bingo!... no current used and as I keep going it starts to send back current (up to a certain point). See those scope shots below the first two.
It is clear that the pulse coil is delayed too much. We will not get it to use no current or send back current this way. We need the mosfet on pulse trigger to be earlier for this to work.
What do you think?... any ideas how to solve this?
@Gyula, please notice that the main coil bump is still there (without the pulse coil) so this is not what we think it is!... notice it goes away when on time is advanced to starting to come back but in negative as it send most current back. What could this be?
Luc
Quote from: gotoluc on April 06, 2010, 12:07:00 PM
At everyone,
I I found something important that is preventing the circuit to show its full potential.
I decided to reproduce as close as I can the sine signal the pulsing produces when connected between the gate and source of the mosfet. Using my Signal Generator in sine wave I matched the and adjusted the output to the exact vpp the pulse coil produces. Once I had them matched up as best I can I pulled out the pulse coil and connected only the generator. To my surprise the current draws is exactly the same as when the Pulse coil is connected and self pulsing. I would of though it would use less current since the switching is now powered by the generator! However this is not the case and I also found something even more important.
See the first 2 scope below to see first the pulse coil (self pulse mode) shot and next the generator pulsing the circuit.
All tests are using the same 3vdc feed and IRF640 mosfet with same dual coil toroid @ 1075mH (no magnet)
Green scope probe is between mosfet drain and source and Yellow scope probe is between mosfet gate and source.
Why is this important!... because ever since I've been using the pulse coil I lost the ability to control the mosfet switch on timing. If you look at all the scope shots I posted before, when using the pulse coil you will see it has this delay. However if I use the generators I can adjust the on time timing.
So without changing the setup I only turned the micro frequency adjustment on the generator to make the mosfet turn on time sooner and bingo!... no current used and as I keep going it starts to back current (up to a certain point). See those scope shots below the first two.
It is clear that the pulse coil is delayed too much. We will not get it to use no current or send back current this way. We need the mosfet on pulse trigger to be earlier for this to work.
What do you think?... any ideas solve this?
@Gyula, please notice that the coil bump is still there (without the pulse coil) so this is not what we think it is!... notice it goes away when on time is advanced to starting to come back but in negative as it send most current back. What could this be?
Luc
Gotoluc,
First, I think you should be driving your MOSFET with only rectangular pulses. Any time the MOSFET is partially on the resistance increases and you burn power.
The drive current on a MOSFET is next to nothing because the gate is capacitive. It takes current to fill the capacitive gate but it should not pass through to the source. Make sure the drive voltage is as close to the positive rail as you can get or you may not fully switch the gate. A driver circuit is good at doing this because you can take a weak 3V pulse and drive a 50V MOSFET with it.
Am I correct to assume that your signal generator can't change the duty cycle? This is a problem as I predict you will get better performance with a high volt, narrow, and correctly timed pulse. Can you do this with your 555 circuit?
Also, if you want the coil to trigger the MOSFET at a different delay you can drive the 555 in monostable mode to adjust the timing however you want.
I use a Rigol DG1022 signal generator and it is awesome if you have $700 to burn. Absolutely the best buy out there...
http://www.tequipment.net/RigolDG1022.html
Chad.
Quote from: chadj on April 06, 2010, 03:50:29 PM
Gotoluc,
First, I think you should be driving your MOSFET with only rectangular pulses. Any time the MOSFET is partially on the resistance increases and you burn power.
The drive current on a MOSFET is next to nothing because the gate is capacitive. It takes current to fill the capacitive gate but it should not pass through to the source. Make sure the drive voltage is as close to the positive rail as you can get or you may not fully switch the gate. A driver circuit is good at doing this because you can take a weak 3V pulse and drive a 50V MOSFET with it.
Am I correct to assume that your signal generator can't change the duty cycle? This is a problem as I predict you will get better performance with a high volt, narrow, and correctly timed pulse. Can you do this with your 555 circuit?
Also, if you want the coil to trigger the MOSFET at a different delay you can drive the 555 in monostable mode to adjust the timing however you want.
I use a Rigol DG1022 signal generator and it is awesome if you have $700 to burn. Absolutely the best buy out there...
http://www.tequipment.net/RigolDG1022.html
Chad.
Hi Chad,
thanks for posting these details :)
I do agree with you on what you posted if this was a normal electronic circuit. However this is not a normal circuit. I have tried the suggestions you have posted before.
The thing is the circuit naturally creates the sine wave once the main coil starts to resonate and doing the things you suggest above I've concluded will affect the natural way the circuit wants to function.
The 1st Scope shot below is so far the best score mosfet IRFBC20
With 3vdc at 10KHz with main toroid at 337mH and pulse coil at 225mH the circuit operates with just 4.3uA
The 2nd Scope shot below is the next best mosfet IRF640
With 3vdc at 10KHz with main toroid at 165.3mH pulse coil at 96mH the circuit operates with 9.4uA
So it does look like a mosfet of a lower capacitance like the IRFBC20 is better for what I'm trying to do.
Thanks for sharing.
Luc
ADDEDI added a red circle to each shot so you can see for yourself that it is in fact the advance timing of the pulse coil that gives the saving as I stated in my post above.
Hi Luc,
Would you insert a 10 kOhm resistor in series with the 3V battery and feed you latest two oscillators above via this 10 kOhm? Just use any normal small wattage resistor and no problem its tolarance (you can meauser it with a DMM).
Would be interested in learning the voltage drop across the 10 kOhm, measured with you handhald DVM(s).
Such a huge value resistor should not affect the oscillators operation, due to the microamper current draw only.
(NExt time please try to make DC coupled scope shots too.)
Must go now.
Thanks, Gyula
Quote from: gyulasun on April 06, 2010, 06:36:46 PM
Hi Luc,
Would you insert a 10 kOhm resistor in series with the 3V battery and feed you latest two oscillators above via this 10 kOhm? Just use any normal small wattage resistor and no problem its tolarance (you can meauser it with a DMM).
Would be interested in learning the voltage drop across the 10 kOhm, measured with you handhald DVM(s).
Such a huge value resistor should not affect the oscillators operation, due to the microamper current draw only.
(NExt time please try to make DC coupled scope shots too.)
Must go now.
Thanks, Gyula
Okay Gyula,
Using the IRFBC20 and running the circuit for 1 minute and 30 seconds the 2% 10K Ohm resistor reached 0.035vdc across it which was measured with my best quality battery operated hand held DMM
Using the IRF640 and running the circuit for 1 minute and 30 seconds the 2% 10K Ohm resistor reached 0.080vdc across it which was measured with my best quality battery operated hand held DMM
Each scope shot
(with DC on probe) is below in the order of the above description.
Luc
@all
On the above two scope pictures: These two transistor are doing pretty much
what one would expect. The IRFBC20 has got a higher Rds so it doesn't pull
down quite as thoroughly as the IRF640. The higher internal resistance is to
be expected from a higher peak voltage transistor.
What would be great is if you could try a P-channel device. This would invert
the green line on the scope and saturate pulling high, potentially creating a
symmetrical drive waveform. They often build a P-channel device that is a mirror
image of N-channel devices so engineers can build "push-pull" output stages.
This may boost the -24ua reverse current up to -48ua reverse current in a
push-pull two transistor driver circuit. Now, as it is, the transistor pulls down
and the coil floats back up, the drive current is occurring only about 1/2 the
time.
I'll not say whether the spikey part or the saturated part is the most overunity.
:S:MarkSCoffman
Quote from: mscoffman link=topic=8892.msg236683#msg236683 =1270665307
@all
On the above two scope : These two are doing pretty much
what one would expect. The IRFBC20 has got a Rds so it doesn't pull
down quite as thoroughly as the IRF640. The higher internal resistance is to
be expected from a higher peak voltage transistor.
What would be great is if you could try a P-channel device. This would invert
the green line on the scope and saturate pulling high, potentially creating a
symmetrical drive waveform. They often build a P-channel device that is a of N-channel devices so engineers can build "push-pull" output stages.
This may boost the -24ua reverse current up to -48ua reverse current in a
push-pull two transistor driver circuit. Now, as it is, the transistor pulls down
and the coil floats back up, the drive current is occurring only about 1/2 the
time.
I'll not say whether the spikey part or the saturated part is the most overunity.
:S:MarkSCoffman
P-Channel MOSFETs are not very common and can't offer the same performance as N-channel. You can get around this by putting an N-channel on the high side of the inductor and connecting the gate to a high-side driver. The driver will hold the gate voltage well above the positive rail for the duration of the cycle.
There are 2 ways to do this:
1. Give the gate its own transformer.
2. Build a circuit that charges a capacitor during the inactive part and shifts the voltage up during the active. There are many available driver IC's that can do this.
Regards,
Jules.
Quote from: chadj on April 07, 2010, 03:38:23 PM
P-Channel MOSFETs are not very common and can't offer the same performance as N-channel. You can get around this by putting an N-channel on the high side of the inductor and connecting the gate to a high-side driver. The driver will hold the gate voltage well above the positive rail for the duration of the cycle.
There are 2 ways to do this:
1. Give the gate its own transformer.
2. Build a circuit that charges a capacitor during the inactive part and shifts the voltage up during the active. There are many available driver IC's that can do this.
Regards,
Jules.
Hi Jules,
I have some IRF9640 P channel mosfets and they don't seem to work with the pulse coil. I tried them before and tried them now and I can't make it self pulse.
I don't know what kind of circuit I need since I don't know much about electronics. All I know is, if I had a circuit that could be powered by 3vdc at 10u and capable of producing 7vpp sine wave (square wave may work) at around 10KHz with adjustable frequency, then this Toroid coil should give OU from what I can tell.
If you can provide a circuit that can do this, all credit will be yours!
Thanks for sharing.
Luc
Quote from: gotoluc on April 07, 2010, 04:14:11 PM
Hi Jules,
I have some IRF9640 P channel mosfets and they don't seem to work with the pulse coil. I tried them before and tried them now and I can't make it self pulse.
I don't know what kind of circuit I need since I don't know much about electronics. All I know is, if I had a circuit that could be powered by 3vdc at 10u and capable of producing 7vpp sine wave (square wave may work) at around 10KHz with adjustable frequency, then this Toroid coil should give OU from what I can tell.
If you can provide a circuit that can do this, will be yours!
Thanks for sharing.
Luc
Luc,
The circuit in its present condition leaves very little power for auxiliary circuits. At this point I think it is more important to understand how to increase the output. There is probably a lot of power being being burned through the copper losses but who knows because the current is zero? Can this be done with less windings? Would a gap or shunt make a difference? What happens when you change the angle of the magnet? Can you do this with an E core?
Ideally we need some computer modeling of the magnetic field. This data could be compared with static tests of the toroid to compare for accuracy. I have a lot going on right now and I may get to this but it will not be for a while.
Thanks!
Jules.
I'm still looking at inductances with various setups - I noticed something which I cant explain, I'm hoping one of you can.
I wound a new toroid (Finemet nanocrystalline - small, about 14mm in diameter). Once wound it has an inductance of 250mH. As I approach my large 2" dia magnet, its inductance INCREASES to a peak, and then begins falling off as expected. The maximum inductance increase is found when the toroid approaches the north or south pole of the magnet, with the toroid parallel with the magnet (inner hole facing the magnets pole). The increase goes from 250mH to 500mH before falling off.
What mechanism is causing the toroid to GAIN inductance by the presence of the permanent magnets field? I thought I understood the lowering of inductance, I just dont understand the gain.
Quote from: gotoluc on April 06, 2010, 12:07:00 PM
At everyone,
I think I found something important that is preventing the circuit to show its full potential.
I decided to reproduce as close as I can the sine wave signal the self pulsing coil produces when connected between the gate and source of the mosfet. Using my Signal Generator in sine wave I matched the frequency and adjusted the output to the exact vpp the pulse coil produces. Once I had them matched up as best I can I pulled out the pulse coil and connected only the generator. To my surprise the current draws is exactly the same as when the Pulse coil is connected and self pulsing. I would of though it would use less current since the switching is now powered by the generator! However this is not the case and I also found something even more important.
See the first 2 scope shots below to see first the pulse coil (self pulse mode) shot and next the generator pulsing the circuit.
All tests are using the same 3vdc feed and IRF640 mosfet with same dual coil toroid @ 1075mH (no magnet)
Green scope probe is between mosfet drain and source and Yellow scope probe is between mosfet gate and source.
Why is this important!... because ever since I've been using the pulse coil I lost the ability to control the mosfet switch on timing. If you look at all the scope shots I posted before, when using the pulse coil you will see it has this delay. However if I use the generators I can adjust the on time timing.
So without changing the setup I only turned the micro frequency adjustment on the generator to make the mosfet turn on time sooner and bingo!... no current used and as I keep going it starts to send back current (up to a certain point). See those scope shots below the first two.
It is clear that the pulse coil is delayed too much. We will not get it to use no current or send back current this way. We need the mosfet on pulse trigger to be earlier for this to work.
What do you think?... any ideas how to solve this?
@Gyula, please notice that the main coil bump is still there (without the pulse coil) so this is not what we think it is!... notice it goes away when on time is advanced to starting to come back but in negative as it send most current back. What could this be?
Luc
Hi Luc,
I am not sure on a correct answer for your last question above, it must have a relationship with the MOSFET switching on just or very near there in time.
When you replace the pulse coil with the sig gen, and supply the same amplitude at the same frequency, then the MOSFET capacitances are surely the same like with the pulse coil. The resonant pulse coil is a pure resistance in the oscillator mode, it is just like you place a several tens of kOhm resistor between the gate-source electrodes.
And when you connect the sig gen instead of the coil, it also has a pure resistance, though it is 50 Ohm, not many kOhms, this does not matter because the original resonant voltage is still there from the generator with the correct amplitude and frequency.
And when you slightly mistune the generator, then the amplitude stays the same but now the small frequency change causes a different phase relationship with the drain circuit that did not change. The FET gate-drain capacitance will have also a slighly different reactance now at this newer freq, alltogether these explain why the drain - gate waveshapes now can be shifted wrt each other.
Maybe this latter could be done with the pulse coil in place if the gate-drain capacitance could be made a bit variable. Have you placed ,say, a 20-30pF (or some more) capacitor between the gate-drain in a running oscillator to see if the waveforms shift away wrt each other? It is possible that the gate-drain FET capacitance ought to be reduced and NOT increased: this can be possible only to use a big value tuneable inductance between the gate-drain but in series with a big uF capacitor to block DC. The latter method is called neutralization of the unwanted capacitance in an active device between its input and output electrodes, not often used in oscillators though, normally the active device is chosen for the oscillator with the smallest C
rss capacitance.
Thank you for the series 10kOhm test, I simply wanted to create an extreme value supply inner impedance for the oscillator. If you found more or less the same 'willingness' for oscillation with the 10kOhm like without it, then it is ok.
Will ponder on these...
rgds, Gyula
Quote from: void109 on April 07, 2010, 05:04:46 PM
I'm still looking at inductances with various setups - I noticed something which I cant explain, I'm hoping one of you can.
I wound a new toroid (Finemet nanocrystalline - small, about 14mm in diameter). Once wound it has an inductance of 250mH. As I approach my large 2" dia magnet, its inductance INCREASES to a peak, and then begins falling off as expected. The maximum inductance increase is found when the toroid approaches the north or south pole of the magnet, with the toroid parallel with the magnet (inner hole facing the magnets pole). The increase goes from 250mH to 500mH before falling off.
What mechanism is causing the toroid to GAIN inductance by the presence of the permanent magnets field? I thought I understood the lowering of inductance, I just dont understand the gain.
Hi,
Mind answering some questions?
Do you have the exact type of the core?
What if you approach the core with a much smaller magnet in the same way?
What if you approach the core tangentially with a small or with the big magnet? (Tangentially= simple let the magnet attract to side of the core on its outside perimeter.)
The answer to your question is probably in the way you place the core in parallel with the big magnet, flux surely is concentrated or collected first in the core more or less equally, without any chance for saturation. Then at closer and closer the core cannot 'collect' more flux and starts saturate: inductance falls.
rgds, Gyula
Quote from: chadj on April 07, 2010, 04:49:39 PM
Luc,
The circuit in its present condition leaves very little power for auxiliary circuits. At this point I think it is more important to understand how to increase the output. There is probably a lot of power being being burned through the copper losses but who knows because the current is zero? Can this be done with less windings? Would a gap or shunt make a difference? What happens when you change the angle of the magnet? Can you do this with an E core?
Ideally we need some computer modeling of the magnetic field. This data could be compared with static tests of the toroid to compare for accuracy. I have a lot going on right now and I may get to this but it will not be for a while.
Thanks!
Jules.
Hi Jules,
Q: Can this be done with less windings?
A: from everything I have seen and done I would say no!... Actually, my conclusion so far is that more windings are needed. If the inductance is raised that means more PM flux can be applied which if I understand this correctly should give a stronger kick back I think.
Q: Would a gap or shunt make a difference?
A: I don't understand this question ???
Q: What happens when you change the angle of the magnet?
A: No difference. There is nothing special about the magnet position, distance and quantity of magnets. It all about how much PM flux the core should have for the proper balance between it and the coils flux when switched on. I'm quite sure the core should not be saturated by the PM. I would say once the PM is applied the core needs to have enough flux space left over for when the coil is energized that its flux can go in and create a compression effect against the PM flux. This is how I understand it at this time.
Q: Can you do this with an E core?
A: I have not tried it but I think a Toroid wins on most inductance created for the wire length. This I think is the most important, since the result will be less resistance and reactance time.
Hope this answer your questions.
Luc
Quote from: void109 on April 07, 2010, 05:04:46 PM
I'm still looking at inductances with various setups - I noticed something which I cant explain, I'm hoping one of you can.
I wound a new toroid (Finemet nanocrystalline - small, about 14mm in diameter). Once wound it has an inductance of 250mH. As I approach my large 2" dia magnet, its inductance INCREASES to a peak, and then begins falling off as expected. The maximum inductance increase is found when the toroid approaches the north or south pole of the magnet, with the toroid parallel with the magnet (inner hole facing the magnets pole). The increase goes from 250mH to 500mH before falling off.
What mechanism is causing the toroid to GAIN inductance by the presence of the permanent magnets field? I thought I understood the lowering of inductance, I just dont understand the gain.
Hi void109,
I think Inductance should be measured when there is no magnetic fields moving around. A moving magnet will induce an electrical current in the coil and interfere with the sampling frequency your inductance meter is sending through the coil to give you a reading.
That's what I think.
Luc
Quote from: gyulasun on April 07, 2010, 05:31:24 PM
Hi,
Mind answering some questions?
Do you have the exact type of the core?
What if you approach the core with a much smaller magnet in the same way?
What if you approach the core tangentially with a small or with the big magnet? (Tangentially= simple let the magnet attract to side of the core on its outside perimeter.)
The answer to your question is probably in the way you place the core in parallel with the big magnet, flux surely is concentrated or collected first in the core more or less equally, without any chance for saturation. Then at closer and closer the core cannot 'collect' more flux and starts saturate: inductance falls.
rgds, Gyula
Hi Gyula,
The core is MP1305LF3T
http://www.metglas.com/products/page5_2_2_3_3.htm
A much smaller magnet does not increase the inductance, but it does reduce the inductance as expected. I have various magnet sizes, I'll try with several more to see if there's a tipping point.
The increase does not seem to occur if approached tangentially - but for maximum increase, you have to approach as I described. My original numbers were wrong, it was from memory. More precisely the inductance of the core is 25mH outside of the field. After securing it to the magnet with electrical tapes using plastic guitar pics as spacers for an air gap, it now has a measured inductance of 71mH. The highest I could get is 71.9, but its VERY touchy - it falls off very rapidly if I move it in any direction more than 1mm.
@Luc - I have it fixed in place, it is a constant inductance while within the magnets field.
With it fixed in place, I have tried finding its resonant point both with a 10nF and 100uF capacitors. No luck - I do the math, no dice - I tried to "eye ball" it on the scope, and I cant find resonance - it appears that resonance may be just outside of my function generators range as I can see the ringing of the circuit after a pulse, and it appears a bit higher than 4Mhz.
Quote from: gyulasun on April 07, 2010, 05:18:00 PM
Hi Luc,
I am not sure on a correct answer for your last question above, it must have a relationship with the MOSFET switching on just or very near there in time.
When you replace the pulse coil with the sig gen, and supply the same amplitude at the same frequency, then the MOSFET capacitances are surely the same like with the pulse coil. The resonant pulse coil is a pure resistance in the oscillator mode, it is just like you place a several tens of kOhm resistor between the gate-source electrodes.
And when you connect the sig gen instead of the coil, it also has a pure resistance, though it is 50 Ohm, not many kOhms, this does not matter because the original resonant voltage is still there from the generator with the correct amplitude and frequency.
And when you slightly mistune the generator, then the amplitude stays the same but now the small frequency change causes a different phase relationship with the drain circuit that did not change. The FET gate-drain capacitance will have also a slighly different reactance now at this newer freq, alltogether these explain why the drain - gate waveshapes now can be shifted wrt each other.
Maybe this latter could be done with the pulse coil in place if the gate-drain capacitance could be made a bit variable. Have you placed ,say, a 20-30pF (or some more) capacitor between the gate-drain in a running oscillator to see if the waveforms shift away wrt each other? It is possible that the gate-drain FET capacitance ought to be reduced and NOT increased: this can be possible only to use a big value tuneable inductance between the gate-drain but in series with a big uF capacitor to block DC. The latter method is called neutralization of the unwanted capacitance in an active device between its input and output electrodes, not often used in oscillators though, normally the active device is chosen for the oscillator with the smallest Crss capacitance.
Thank you for the series 10kOhm test, I simply wanted to create an extreme value supply inner impedance for the oscillator. If you found more or less the same 'willingness' for oscillation with the 10kOhm like without it, then it is ok.
Will ponder on these...
rgds, Gyula
Hi Gyula,
thanks for taking the time to post your explanation.
I did experiment some days back of adding a small pf capacitance between the drain and source and it has an effect on the pulse coil and main coil. It reduces the amplitude of the main coil and makes the pulse coil (top) fatter and rounder. It also causes a small advance timing shifts to the pulse coil and resulting in a small drop in current.
I don't believe the above to be a true benefit as it's kind of clear that a lower capacitance mosfet is the way to go. Yesterday I ordered some IRF510 which have a little lower capacitance then the IRFBC20 but a much lower gate resistance. I also bought 2 other 20v mosfet models irlml2502 and FDC637AN on ebay which have a low gate trigger voltage to see how they would performs also.
I attached all the pdf data sheet below for reviewing.
Luc
Quote from: void109 on April 07, 2010, 08:36:09 PM
Hi Gyula,
The core is MP1305LF3T
http://www.metglas.com/products/page5_2_2_3_3.htm
A much smaller magnet does not increase the inductance, but it does reduce the inductance as expected. I have various magnet sizes, I'll try with several more to see if there's a tipping point.
The increase does not seem to occur if approached tangentially - but for maximum increase, you have to approach as I described. My original numbers were wrong, it was from memory. More precisely the inductance of the core is 25mH outside of the field. After securing it to the magnet with electrical tapes using plastic guitar pics as spacers for an air gap, it now has a measured inductance of 71mH. The highest I could get is 71.9, but its VERY touchy - it falls off very rapidly if I move it in any direction more than 1mm.
@Luc - I have it fixed in place, it is a constant inductance while within the magnets field.
With it fixed in place, I have tried finding its resonant point both with a 10nF and 100uF capacitors. No luck - I do the math, no dice - I tried to "eye ball" it on the scope, and I cant find resonance - it appears that resonance may be just outside of my function generators range as I can see the ringing of the circuit after a pulse, and it appears a bit higher than 4Mhz.
Thanks void109 for confirming this was happening with fixed positions.
In that case can anyone think of how we could use this close to 3 times increase in inductance to or benefit?
Thanks for sharing your findings
Luc
ADDEDvoid109, can you make a drawing of the position of your magnet an toroid so I can be clear on this. Thanks
ADDEDNever mind, I reread your post and it is clear but I tried it with my toroid and I don't get any increases that stay. Why the difference ???
Quote from: wozlzl on April 07, 2010, 09:15:23 PM
Even though wow power leveling (http://www.ygscn.net/PowerLevel.php?gid=1) this is a tool that wow power leveling (http://www.toppowerlevel.net) even grandma was familiar with, the wow gold (http://www.ygscn.net/BuyGold.php?gid=1) blender is still quite useful in modern kitchens. This appliance aion power leveling (http://www.ygscn.net/PowerLevel.php?gid=21) is most often used for aion gold (http://www.ygscn.net/BuyGold.php?gid=21) things like mixing drinks and making smoothies. However, it cheap wow power leveling (http://www.ygscn.net/PowerLevel.php?gid=1) is also great for pureeing and buy wow power leveling (http://www.ygscn.net/PowerLevel.php?gid=1) making sauces. Blenders vary quite a bit in quality, so read reviews and check features before buy wow gold (http://www.toppowerlevel.net/buy.php) buying. Surprisingly, you don't have to spend a lot to get a good quality blender. Some of the highest rated models sell for under one hundred dollars.
I have contacted Stefan about this user. All 14 of his posts are this kind of stuff ::)
I don't have a feeling his stay here will be a long one ;)
Luc
Quote from: void109 on April 07, 2010, 05:04:46 PM
I'm still looking at inductances with various setups - I noticed something which I cant explain, I'm hoping one of you can.
I wound a new toroid (Finemet nanocrystalline - small, about 14mm in diameter). Once wound it has an inductance of 250mH. As I approach my large 2" dia magnet, its inductance INCREASES to a peak, and then begins falling off as expected. The maximum inductance increase is found when the toroid approaches the north or south pole of the magnet, with the toroid parallel with the magnet (inner hole facing the magnets pole). The increase goes from 250mH to 500mH before falling off.
What mechanism is causing the toroid to GAIN inductance by the presence of the permanent magnets field? I thought I understood the lowering of inductance, I just dont understand the gain.
Hi void109,
I have a small 14mm toroid on hand and wound it with a very short wire giving me 750uH and can confirm that at a certain position I was able to make the inductance higher, The max I go it to was 925uH.
Your results are quite impressive. Can you give me some details on your 2" magnet. Is this a Neo, ceramic, how thick is it, grade, how close is the toroid?
I noticed if I tilt the toroid a little I got the highest results. Is it the same for you?
Thanks for sharing
Luc
Hi - it is a neo 2" diameter .5" thick. The toroid is about dead center on a pole side - roughly 12mm or so from the magnets surface
I tried to find the same with many other toroids I had previously wound of various unimpressive cores - couldnt see the effect using another unaffixed 2" magnet. Perhaps its a property of the core.
Quote from: void109 on April 07, 2010, 10:40:27 PM
Hi - it is a neo 2" diameter .5" thick. The toroid is about dead center on a pole side - roughly 12mm or so from the magnets surface
I also have a 2" Neo but it's 1" and N52. Quite strong so I have it about 2" away in center.
When you move it away from the center, how far down does the 25mH drop to?
Thanks
Luc
Quote from: void109 on April 07, 2010, 10:54:02 PM
Perhaps its a property of the core.
Yes, that's why I would like to know how far down the inductance drops when the toroid is away from the center of the magnet.
Maybe these cores would be even better for what I'm doing ???
Anyone care to comment
Luc
Quote from: gotoluc on April 07, 2010, 11:19:34 PM
I also have a 2" Neo but it's 1" and N52. Quite strong so I have it about 2" away in center.
When you move it away from the center, how far down does the 25mH drop to?
Thanks
Luc
If its closer to the magnet (not optimal height), its down in the low micro-henry range. In sub optimal positions but at proper height, its around 45-50mH.
Short video demonstrating what I'm seeing with the core:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PuzSkKlnCzc
Quote from: void109 on April 07, 2010, 11:52:28 PM
Short video demonstrating what I'm seeing with the core:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PuzSkKlnCzc
Excellent video demo ;)
Thanks for taking the time to do this and share what you have found.
Going to have to get one of those cores to test this.
Luc
Thanks - sorry for the quality, been awhile since I've uploaded something.
I don't see immediately how this effect is useful. I would like to understand WHY though, because if its a new phenomenon - and new information, it may lead to something useful. :) And if its not a new phenomenon then someone can tell me so and I can stop wasting time thinking about it ???
I'm no expert but if you can close to triple the inductance of a coil by introducing the center of a permanent magnet that sounds good to me.
One use I can think of is a PM attraction motor. The magnet is attracted to the Finemet toroid core (free work) and when it reaches TDC the coil is energized to release the magnets attraction to the core. Since you can close to triple the inductance of a coil using this Finemet core when the magnet is in the ideal location that it needs to be anyways for best results with this magnet motor design to work, the bonus will be that the coils electromagnetic field will be close to 3 times stronger without using more wire length which adds resistance and longer magnetic field reactance time.
It all looks like a win win situation for this kind of thing to me!
@Gyula, what do you think? Sounds like an ORBO ;D
Luc
ADDED
One thing you may want to check is to what inductance the same length of wire can produce on a regular ferrite core of the approximate same size. If it's as high as you can get the Finemet using the magnet then maybe it's not all that great but if it's the same 25mH then I think this is very good. Please let us know of your results.
delays, delays, delays. ;D
delays are bad trips in human attitude but they are very important to make a working self running coil. ;D
Quote from: void109 on April 07, 2010, 08:36:09 PM
Hi Gyula,
The core is MP1305LF3T
http://www.metglas.com/products/page5_2_2_3_3.htm
The Finemet manufactured from Metglas is a (FT-3A
H) and is a square loop core,
http://www.scribd.com/doc/28763938/FineMet-MaterialsI suspect the inductance is increasing until the core is right below the "knee" of the B-H Curve. Any further increase in saturation from this point, then the core's inductance will decrease.
This means if the magnet is placed at a distance where the inductance is the highest in this core material, then it will take
very little input energy to fully saturate the core.
I pushed Finemet extremely hard in the main Orbo thread, but it did not get tested (if it did, then nobody released their test results). Nanoperm, Metglas, and other square loop cores should have similar results.
Metglas and Finemet are sister companies. There are restrictions when ordering Finemet, so there may be delays. Here's an on-line inquiry form for Finemet,
http://www.hitachi-metals.co.jp/e/cntct/indx_cntct2.htmlGB
Quote from: gotoluc on April 08, 2010, 12:51:52 AM
I'm no expert but if you can close to triple the inductance of a coil by introducing the center of a permanent magnet that sounds good to me.
One use I can think of is a PM attraction motor. The magnet is attracted to the Finemet toroid core (free work) and when it reaches TDC the coil is energized to release the magnets attraction to the A. Since you can close to triple the inductance of a coil using this Finemet core when the magnet is in the ideal location that it needs to be anyways for best results with this magnet motor design to work, the bonus will be that the coils electromagnetic field will be close to 3 times stronger without using more wire length which adds resistance and longer magnetic field reactance time.
It all looks like a win win situation for this kind of thing to me!
@Gyula, what do you think? Sounds like an ORBO ;D
Luc
ADDED
One thing you may want to check is to what inductance the same length of wire can produce on a regular ferrite core of the approximate same size. If it's as high as you can get the Finemet using the magnet then maybe it's not all that great but if it's the same 25mH then I think this is very good. Please let us know of your results.
Hi Luc,
If the ORBO principle takes any advantage from core saturation caused by just the closeness of permanent magnets at a moment and this saturation helps reduce the input current need for reaching full or enough saturation to let the rotor escape from the attraction, then the idea of increasing the inductance when the magnet(s) are close to the core sounds counterproductive because higher inductance demands higher input current to do saturation (if comparing to the previous ORBO example). Somehow you have to defeat the extra flux the core possibly collected inside its volume from the strong magnet.
Of course this is what I think and the best would be to see the B-H curve of such core on a scope when the coil's self inductance on it has increased to a higher value due to a nearby magnet, how it would look like.
Maybe this inductance increase could be beneficial at your pulse coil in the oscillator because the copper loss could be decreased by using less wire for the given inductance needed for the oscillator.
By the way, would you tell the DC resistance of the pulse coil you have used in your latest oscillators? I think it is the coil from a shaded pole motor and you tune it by a ferrite rod?
I wonder if you tried a normal toroidal core for the pulse coil between the gate-source electrodes? Or the toroidal core's tuneabilty by a magnet may not give as a flexibility as the ferrite rod does?
Or a toroidal core has a much higher Q than the high DC Ohm motor coil and makes tuning (oscillating at all) very cumbersome? I ask these because the resonant voltage across the gate-source surely depends also on the Q of the resonant circuit. Maybe you have found a certain low (or max a medium) Q value you have at present that gives these <10uA results from the 3V and increasing the Q here would not be beneficial.
rgds, Gyula
EDIT: Luc, when I wrote on the higher current need for a higher inductance above I did not know this core has a square loop B-H curve. See my following letter to gravityblock too.
Quote from: gravityblock on April 08, 2010, 05:26:29 AM
The Finemet manufactured from Metglas is a (FT-3AH) and is a square loop A, http://www.scribd.com/doc/28763938/FineMet-Materials
I suspect the inductance is increasing until the core is right below the "knee" of the B-H Curve. Any further increase in saturation from this point, then the core's inductance will decrease.
This means if the magnet is placed at a distance where the inductance is the highest in this core material, then it will take very little input energy to fully saturate the core.
I pushed Finemet extremely hard in the main Orbo thread, but it did not get tested (if it did, then nobody released their test results). Nanoperm, Metglas, and other square loop cores should have similar results.
Metglas and Finemet are sister companies. There are restrictions when ordering Finemet, so there may be delays. Here's an on-line inquiry form for Finemet, http://www.hitachi-metals.co.jp/e/cntct/indx_cntct2.html
GB
Hi GB,
Thanks for the links, and if these cores has a square loop-like B-H curve indeed than I have to modify my previous letter to Luc because I did not consider in my answer to him the core type had a square loop curve.
Indeed then the coil wound on such a core would surely need a very little input current to get full saturation so that the magnet on the rotor could escape very easily from the attraction situation.
Thanks, Gyula
FYI, I have encountered same effects on MetGlas cores a few weeks ago.
So, it's not only FineMet that shows this effect.
And I would not be surprised if this effect also works for normal ferrite cores.
The external magnet changes the B-H curve of the core material.
Changing the B-H curve means changing the permeability curve, and thus changing the coil value.
Note, that the optimum distance between magnet and toroid is dependent on the current being used (e.g. to measure the coil value).
This means that optimum distance can be different between the measured situation and the real 'in use' situation.
Using a DSO can help you to easily optimize the optimum distance for the 'in use' case (optimize the maximum current delay to a voltage step to find the maximum coil value).
Quote from: gotoluc on April 07, 2010, 10:16:39 PM
I have contacted Stefan about this user. All 14 of his posts are this kind of stuff ::)
> Good.
I don't have a feeling his stay here will be a long one ;)
> I don't know...computers can be very persistant...Gigo. :)
Luc
Quote from: gyulasun on April 08, 2010, 06:06:00 AM
Hi Luc,
If the ORBO principle takes any advantage from core saturation caused by just the closeness of permanent magnets at a moment and this saturation helps reduce the input current need for reaching full or enough saturation to let the rotor escape from the attraction, then the idea of increasing the inductance when the magnet(s) are close to the core sounds counterproductive because higher inductance demands higher input current to do saturation (if comparing to the previous ORBO example). Somehow you have to defeat the extra flux the core possibly collected inside its volume from the strong magnet.
Of course this is what I think and the best would be to see the B-H curve of such core on a scope when the coil's self inductance on it has increased to a higher value due to a nearby magnet, how it would look like.
EDIT: Luc, when I wrote on the higher current need for a higher inductance above I did not know this core has a square loop B-H curve. See my following letter to gravityblock too.
Yes Gyula thanks, I see you have reconsidered this. I will see if I can buy a large Finemet toroid to further experiment with it.
Quote from: gyulasun on April 08, 2010, 06:06:00 AM
Maybe this inductance increase could be beneficial at your pulse coil in the oscillator because the copper loss could be decreased by using less wire for the given inductance needed for the oscillator.
Yes! I definitely agree, this maybe much better then what I have at this time. Needs to be tested.
Quote from: gyulasun on April 08, 2010, 06:06:00 AM
By the way, would you tell the DC resistance of the pulse coil you have used in your latest oscillators? I think it is the coil from a shaded pole motor and you tune it by a ferrite rod?
I'm glad you ask this! because it's hard to believe. Yes it is a shaded pole motor inductor that I use as pulse coil because it's easy to adjust the exact inductance needed by just sliding in or out a long ferrite rod that I made by super gluing 2 AM radio loop stick antenna ferrite rods together. With it I can vary the inductance from 35mH to 350mH. Anyways, it's DC resistance is 67 Ohms. I know many will say that it's a waste of energy but I tried it with my single wound 6.9 Ohm toroid coil and I see no difference. Perhaps because at resonance the coils resistance is not seen? Let me know what you think of this.
Quote from: gyulasun on April 08, 2010, 06:06:00 AM
I wonder if you tried a normal toroidal core for the pulse coil between the gate-source electrodes? Or the toroidal core's tuneabilty by a magnet may not give as a flexibility as the ferrite rod does?
Yes I tried the pulse coil with the toroid as stated above but found no gain.
Quote from: gyulasun on April 08, 2010, 06:06:00 AM
Or a toroidal core has a much higher Q than the high DC Ohm motor coil and makes tuning (oscillating at all) very cumbersome? I ask these because the resonant voltage across the gate-source surely depends also on the Q of the resonant circuit. Maybe you have found a certain low (or max a medium) Q value you have at present that gives these <10uA results from the 3V and increasing the Q here would not be beneficial.
rgds, Gyula
I don't know much about coil Q so I don't know what to answer ???
Hope what I could answer helps.
Luc
Being new to electronics, if someone could point me toward how to build a circuit to see a B-H curve on my scope, I'll take video of the curve rendered by the core when under influence of the magnet and without.
My scope has the option of plotting via X/Y inputs.
Quote from: teslaalset on April 08, 2010, 06:23:43 AM
FYI, I have encountered same effects on MetGlas cores a few weeks ago.
So, it's not only FineMet that shows this effect.
And I would not be surprised if this effect also works for normal ferrite cores.
The external magnet changes the B-H curve of the core material.
Changing the B-H curve means changing the permeability curve, and thus changing the coil value.
Note, that the optimum distance between magnet and toroid is dependent on the current being used (e.g. to measure the coil value).
This means that optimum distance can be different between the measured situation and the real 'in use' situation.
Using a DSO can help you to easily optimize the optimum distance for the 'in use' case (optimize the maximum current delay to a voltage step to find the maximum coil value).
Hi teslaalset,
thanks for posting your findings :)
Can you help me with what I would need to do to setup my DSO scope to measure this. I have no electronics background so I don't know. I've just been learning as I go. I would need an illustration or better a video tutorial as I learn much faster visually.
Thanks for sharing
Luc
Quote from: void109 on April 08, 2010, 11:45:10 AM
Being new to electronics, if someone could point me toward how to build a circuit to see a B-H curve on my scope, I'll take video of the curve rendered by the core when under influence of the magnet and without.
My scope has the option of plotting via X/Y inputs.
Well that makes two of us ;D. It would be great help if someone could make a video tutorial of this.
Luc
Quote from: void109 on April 08, 2010, 11:45:10 AM
Being new to electronics, if someone could point me toward how to build a circuit to see a B-H curve on my scope, I'll take video of the curve rendered by the core when under influence of the magnet and without.
My scope has the option of plotting via X/Y inputs.
Hi Folks,
Here is Naudin tests on this topic, see here, with video too:
http://jnaudin.free.fr/2SGen/indexen.htm#hysteresis
Also, some more info is here:
http://www.cliftonlaboratories.com/type_43_ferrite_b-h_curve.htm
rgds, Gyula
I apologize if I'm just being slow to catch the explanation - but does any of this explain why the inductance **increases** with a specific proximity to the permanent magnet?
If I understand correctly, increased inductance indicates that more current is required to saturate the core? Where does this excess current get stored?
Quote from: void109 on April 08, 2010, 12:11:38 PM
I apologize if I'm just being slow to catch the explanation - but does any of this explain why the inductance **increases** with a specific proximity to the permanent magnet?
If I understand correctly, increased inductance indicates that more current is required to saturate the core? Where does this excess current get stored?
Hi void109,
Sorry but I do not know for sure why the inductance increases for your FineMet core. What I guess is that the paralell arrangement of the core with the magnet's facing side forces the core to 'collect' as much flux as its narrow square loop B-H curve lets, equally inside its full volume, this increases the B inside the core up to a maximum value beyond which saturation suddenly appears. I think it is important here that all the total volume of the core be imposed to the (nearly homogen) flux coming from the facing magnet.
This parallel setup's behavior is in contrast to the setup where you approach a magnet towards the toroidal core from sideways (perpendicularly): in this case the magnet has the main effect only locally at and near the small volume of the core where the magnet is placed: strong flux, hence partial or full saturation can only be created in that part of the core. It is like you would have created a virtual air gap in that part of the core you approached/attached the magnet to. Virtually you "open" a toroidal core if you saturate a small volume of it 'locally' by a strong (but small wrt the full core volume) magnet. This is how I think.
Probably I made the confusion first I was not aware your core has a square loop B-H curve and answered to Luc that increased inductance normally needs higher current, comparing this to his ORBO example where just the opposite happens to the core: in the presence of the magnet the inductance gets reduced due to the core (local) saturation and less inductance has less 'resistance' to current flow than a higher value inductance has. I was thinking generally.
IF you excite a coil's core with current, the current is 'used up' by the wire loss (I
2R) and is used up for rearrangeing the domains in the core from their random 'position' to an 'organised' one, the magnetic energy (that was created from part of the input current) is inside the core, the domains store it temporarily. When you switch the current off most of the domains tries to return to their original random state and 'release' the stored magnetic energy, this is the "collapsing flux's case" and this can be collected from the coil if you steer the suddenly induced voltage spike into a capacitor via a fast switching diode.
Maybe I answered you questions.
rgds, Gyula
Well GB,
here is my update about the Finemet cores. Maybe no one got some because they are next to impossible to buy.
Metglas says their distributor is Elna Magnetics. I called Elna Magnetics and they have no stock, never had. You have to fax them a detailed purchase request and then they will look into it. So I called Metglas and the one person operating this business is away till tomorrow :-\
This does not sound like an available item to me. Nothing else can be found!
User Peterae sent me a Toroid a month ago: http://uk.farnell.com/jsp/search/productdetail.jsp?SKU=3057010
I was saving it for when I find the ideal winding I want. However, last night I decided to wind it using 1 meter of 30AWG 25mm wire on that core which gave 24 turns. The resulting inductance is 9mH which I found kind of high so I wound the same 1 meter of 30AWG 25mm wire on the ferrite toroid core that I have been using in all my tests and it gives 30 turns. Its inductance is 1.22mH.
I'm confused as to why there is such a big difference. Is it the little bit of extra mass? Peterae Toroid TX36/23/15-3E5: OD 36.30mm, ID 22.55mm, height 15.5mm, width 6.8mm compared to my Regular Toroid I have: OD 34.45mm, ID 20.0mm, height 11.95mm, width 6.85mm
If someone can help explain the difference that would be helpful and appreciated.
Thanks
Luc
Quote from: gotoluc on April 08, 2010, 11:49:21 AM
Hi teslaalset,
thanks for posting your findings :)
Can you help me with what I would need to do to setup my DSO scope to measure this. I have no electronics background so I don't know. I've just been learning as I go. I would need an illustration or better a video tutorial as I learn much faster visually.
Thanks for sharing
Luc
Sure Luc,
Have a look at my posting at the Steorn discussion thread, posting #2849, here:
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=8411.2835
In Fig 3 Scoop, bottom picture, the delay between the raising edge of the bottom signal (= the signal of the signal generator), and the upward curve of the middle signal in the picture (= measured value of the current through the coil) should be maximized to obtain the maximum coil value.
Some additional explanation of this measurement:
If you switch a voltage over a coil, the current through the coil always lags the start of the voltage step.
The larger the coil value, the larger the delay of the current.
So, by moving the magnet the delay can be optimized and thus the coil value.
Hope this helps. If you need additional explanation, let me know.
(at the time of these finding I used a CRO instead of a DSO)
I want to try to state this again, to be sure I understand.
If we have our Finemet coil - and we pulse it with x Current, such that the core is saturated (no more room for flux!), we can then, while saturated, lower it toward the magnets 'sweet spot', where by the inductance will increase 300%, its capacity for storing flux by 300%, and we can then store more energy in the magnetic flux?
If that sounds like an accurate description of what this implies - anyone fancy an idea as to where this extra flux gets stored? Does the presence of this sweet spot perhaps increase the permeability even further (300%)?
I'm sorry if this is derailing the thread, seemed like it may be relevant. As a side note - instead of fiddling with H-Bridge circuits which arent working out quite how I'd like, I'm just going to run to a second hand store and get a big audio hi-fi amp to amplify the signal from my generators. No sense in banging my head on those concepts when I'm just trying to research various phenomena. Any reason that's a bad notion?
-void
Quote from: void109 on April 08, 2010, 04:03:17 PM
I want to try to state this again, to be sure I understand.
If we have our Finemet coil - and we pulse it with x Current, such that the core is saturated (no more room for flux!), we can then, while saturated, lower it toward the magnets 'sweet spot', where by the inductance will increase 300%, its capacity for storing flux by 300%, and we can then store more energy in the magnetic flux?
If that sounds like an accurate description of what this implies - anyone fancy an idea as to where this extra flux gets stored? Does the presence of this sweet spot perhaps increase the permeability even further (300%)?
I'm sorry if this is derailing the thread, seemed like it may be relevant. As a side note - instead of fiddling with H-Bridge circuits which arent working out quite how I'd like, I'm just going to run to a second hand store and get a big audio hi-fi amp to amplify the signal from my generators. No sense in banging my head on those concepts when I'm just trying to research various phenomena. Any reason that's a bad notion?
-void
@void
If you go through again what was written then you find out that nobody meant or implied what you deduced above, sorry.
I did not write that
first you saturate the Finemet core with current
then you can increase its inductance by a strong permanent magnet placed near to it in the way you showed in the video. IF you have read such, please point me to that mail.
Member Gravityblock wrote this, I qouted in
bold what is important:
Quote from: gravityblock on April 08, 2010, 05:26:29 AM
The Finemet manufactured from Metglas is a (FT-3AH) and is a square loop core, http://www.scribd.com/doc/28763938/FineMet-Materials
I suspect the inductance is increasing until the core is right below the "knee" of the B-H Curve. Any further increase in saturation from this point, then the core's inductance will decrease.
This means if the magnet is placed at a distance where the inductance is the highest in this core material, then it will take very little input energy to fully saturate the core.
....
So I do not think he meant the opposite sequence as you got it.
First step is to align the magnet wrt the core to cause an inductance increase as much as possible, just to the edge beyond which inductance value collapses down.
Second step is to apply a current which can be a small one to help bring the core into the saturation state (as if you had moved the magnet say half a millimeter closer, to cause the inductance collapse.
The original ORBO concept Luc referred to (when he described his idea for applying this inductance increase you showed to an ORBO-like setup) is that a magnet approaches a toroidal core perpendiculary, saturates that part of the core, then current is introduced into the coil on the core to help deepen the saturation so that the magnet could easily escape from the attraction.
Hope this helps.
Gyula
Hi void,
please don't think this is derailing the thread as this could bring much more light to the topic. I'm very interested and I'm sure others are also.
Using an Audio amp is a good idea for frequencies below 20Khz
I can't help you with your question as I'm not sure it was explained like that. I think Gyula tried to make it clearer. One way or the other it's best to test and see the results to learn.
Looking forward to a test video ;)
Thanks for sharing
Luc
Quote from: gotoluc on April 08, 2010, 02:31:35 PM
...
User Peterae sent me a Toroid a month ago: http://uk.farnell.com/jsp/search/productdetail.jsp?SKU=3057010
I was saving it for when I find the ideal winding I want. However, last night I decided to wind it using 1 meter of 30AWG 25mm wire on that core which gave 24 turns. The resulting inductance is 9mH which I found kind of high so I wound the same 1 meter of 30AWG 25mm wire on the ferrite toroid core that I have been using in all my tests and it gives 30 turns. Its inductance is 1.22mH.
I'm confused as to why there is such a big difference. Is it the little bit of extra mass? Peterae Toroid TX36/23/15-3E5: OD 36.30mm, ID 22.55mm, height 15.5mm, width 6.8mm compared to my Regular Toroid I have: OD 34.45mm, ID 20.0mm, height 11.95mm, width 6.85mm
If someone can help explain the difference that would be helpful and appreciated.
Thanks
Luc
Hi Luc,
The so called A
L value for the Ferroxcube core is 11400nH/N
2 (taken from the Farnell link). If you wound 24 turns on it then the formula for L is L=N
2*A
L=24*24*11.4=6.566mH
You measured 9mH instead, this difference can only be explained by a high manufacturing tolerance.
On you other 'usual' core you got 1.22mH for the 30 turns from the same length of wire. If I recall the A
L value I calculated for your core is A
L=1298.6nH/N
2 This gives 30*30*1.2986=1.168mH, very close to your measured 1.22mH.
The big difference comes from the big A
L value differences. Putting it otherwise: the Ferroxcube core has a much higher permeability than the other core. (7730 vs 1196)
rgds, Gyula
Oh I wasnt saying anyone proposed that example, that was just a thought experiment on my part - given assertions that were made, which were:
1 - Higher inductance means it takes more current to saturate the core (?)
2 - Saturation means that the core material cannot contain any further flux (?)
3 - The inductance of the coil increases in a certain position and arrangement relative to the permanent magnet (?)
4 - If the saturation increases - that implies that the coil now has increased capacity to contain further flux (?)
Those are my assumptions based on my current understanding.
So what I said before was a thought experiment based on the above postulates - if any of those assertions are wrong - please tell me :) And number 3 is just from my own experiment, the first two are factoids I've gleaned from folks here more knowledgeable than myself like you fine gentlemen. The thought experiment just outlined my confusion as to the *how* the inductance can rise given its proximity to the magnet. I appreciate the feedback.
Quote from: gyulasun on April 08, 2010, 05:21:09 PM
Hi Luc,
The so called AL value for the Ferroxcube core is 11400nH/N2 (taken from the Farnell link). If you wound 24 turns on it then the formula for L is L=N2*AL=24*24*11.4=6.566mH
You measured 9mH instead, this difference can only be explained by a high manufacturing tolerance.
On you other 'usual' core you got 1.22mH for the 30 turns from the same length of wire. If I recall the AL value I calculated for your core is AL=1298.6nH/N2 This gives 30*30*1.2986=1.168mH, very close to your measured 1.22mH.
The big difference comes from the big AL value differences. Putting it otherwise: the Ferroxcube core has a much higher permeability than the other core. (7730 vs 1196)
rgds, Gyula
Thanks once again Gyula for your time in explaining this! much appreciated :)
I have more questions regarding the BH curves and permeability and was wondering if we could just talk on Skype, it would be much faster than writing and save time. Are you set up and able to do this?
Thanks
Luc
I'm wondering if the magnets effect on the toroid may be interfering with whatever method the LCR meter uses to determine the inductance. I've paired this toroid with several capacitors, and using the inductance it appears to have while positioned on the magnet, and I have not yet been able to get a resonant sine wave out of it. So I'm wondering if the inductance reading isn't just incorrect.
Quote from: void109 on April 08, 2010, 11:52:45 PM
I'm wondering if the magnets effect on the toroid may be interfering with whatever method the LCR meter uses to determine the inductance. I've paired this toroid with several capacitors, and using the inductance it appears to have while positioned on the magnet, and I have not yet been able to get a resonant sine wave out of it. So I'm wondering if the inductance reading isn't just incorrect.
Hi void,
at what frequency are you trying to get resonance?
Luc
Quote from: gotoluc on April 08, 2010, 11:34:59 AM
...
Yes it is a shaded pole motor inductor that I use as pulse coil because it's easy to adjust the exact inductance needed by just sliding in or out a long ferrite rod that I made by super gluing 2 AM radio loop stick antenna ferrite rods together. With it I can vary the inductance from 35mH to 350mH. Anyways, it's DC resistance is 67 Ohms. I know many will say that it's a waste of energy but I tried it with my single wound 6.9 Ohm toroid coil and I see no difference. Perhaps because at resonance the coils resistance is not seen? Let me know what you think of this.
Yes I tried the pulse coil with the toroid as stated above but found no gain.
I don't know much about coil Q so I don't know what to answer ???
Hi Luc,
It is interesting you did not find any advantage in using a toroidal core+coil instead of the shaded pole motor coil. I wonder if the two coils had the same inductance then? (it would mean the oscillator had run nearly on the same frequency with the two different kind of coils.
Yes, the motor coil's 67 Ohm DC resistance is very high, unusual to use it in an oscillator where generally everything is done to reduce losses in the resonant LC circuit that also determines the oscillating frequency :)
Well, normally the higher a coil Q, the less loss it has, this means the less input energy is needed for maintaining oscillation. (coil loss=DC resistance + core hysteresis and eddy current losses) At resonance the coil's DC resistance 'disappears' indeed, a resonant impedance appears across the coil instead, this can be from several tens to a few hundreds of kOhm range at your frequencies involved, just because the Q 'magnifies' the resonant impedance hence voltage.
Maybe it would be wise to check again at one frequency in your oscillator, what advantage if any a high Q coil has versus the low Q motor coil. This would involve picking a frequency where you can insure the same inductance for both coils, especially if you have already a ready toroidal coil in the 100-240mH range to which you can easily match the motor coil's inductance with the ferrite rods.
In a high Q LC circuit the resonant AC voltage can be much higher than in a low Q one because of the less losses involved. Normally this is beneficial for an oscillator but in your MOSFET circuit the peak to peak voltage should not be let to be higher than about 40V
pp because the allowable maximum gate-source voltage must be +/-20V (FET type dependent though but valid for most).
The higher resonant AC voltage means that the LC tank can store higher reactive peak power i.e. the circuit would need even less input current to make up for the less loss. Could you recall what the gate-source voltage was when you used a toroidal coil for the pulse coil?
IF you found no significant difference, maybe the first step would be to check what the Q of that toroidal core actually is. Whenever you have time you could measure the Q of these coils as I outlined in an earlier post:
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=8892.510
This way you can also gain some further insite what the Q means for coils.
rgds, Gyula
PS 1) Thank you for asking on the Skype, I do not use it (not yet installed). By the way I am not an expert on the B-H curves... for instance I wish I knew the real explanation why the L increases on a toroidal coil when you parallel facing its core with a big magnet...
2) I have seen the data sheets of your newer FETs, perhaps IRLML2502 seems the most promising with its low gate threshold voltage and gate charge needs.
Quote from: void109 on April 08, 2010, 06:20:47 PM
Oh I wasnt saying anyone proposed that example, that was just a thought experiment on my part - given assertions that were made, which were:
1 - Higher inductance means it takes more current to saturate the core (?)
2 - Saturation means that the core material cannot contain any further flux (?)
3 - The inductance of the coil increases in a certain position and arrangement relative to the permanent magnet (?)
4 - If the saturation increases - that implies that the coil now has increased capacity to contain further flux (?)
Those are my assumptions based on my current understanding.
So what I said before was a thought experiment based on the above postulates - if any of those assertions are wrong - please tell me :) And number 3 is just from my own experiment, the first two are factoids I've gleaned from folks here more knowledgeable than myself like you fine gentlemen. The thought experiment just outlined my confusion as to the *how* the inductance can rise given its proximity to the magnet. I appreciate the feedback.
1) All I can say is that it is a complex problem, depends on several factors. (What I wrote to Luc on it was in connection of his ORBO question, see it in my earlier posts.)
2) Here is explanation from this link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturation_%28magnetic%29 :
"Ferromagnetic materials like iron that show saturation are composed of microscopic regions called magnetic domains that act like tiny permanent magnets. Before an external magnetic field is applied to the material, the domains are oriented in random directions. Their tiny magnetic fields point in random directions and cancel each other out, so the material has no overall net magnetic field. When an external magnetizing field H is applied to the material, it penetrates the material and aligns the domains, causing their tiny magnetic fields to turn and align parallel to the external field, adding together to create a large magnetic field which extends out from the material. This is called magnetization. The stronger the external magnetic field, the more the domains align. Saturation occurs when practically all the domains are lined up, so further increases in applied field can't cause further alignment of the domains. This is a simplified account; a more complete explanation can be found in Ferromagnetism."
3) You have made nice experiments on your question, carry on and learn.
4) See the link at 2) above.
Quote from: gotoluc on April 08, 2010, 02:31:35 PM
Well GB,
here is my about the Finemet cores. Maybe no one got some because they are next to impossible to buy.
Metglas says their distributor is Elna Magnetics. I called Elna Magnetics and they have no stock, never had. You have to fax them a detailed purchase request and then they will look into it. So I called Metglas and the one person operating this business is away till tomorrow :-\
This does not sound like an available item to me. Nothing else can be found!
User Peterae sent me a Toroid a month ago: http://uk.farnell.com/jsp/search/productdetail.jsp?SKU=3057010
I was saving it for when I find the ideal winding I want. However, last night I decided to wind it using 1 meter of 30AWG 25mm wire on that core which gave 24 turns. The resulting inductance is 9mH which I found kind of high so I wound the same 1 meter of 30AWG 25mm wire on the ferrite toroid core that I have been using in all my tests and it gives 30 turns. Its inductance is 1.22mH.
I'm confused as to why there is such a big difference. Is it the little bit of extra mass? Peterae Toroid TX36/23/15-3E5: OD 36.30mm, ID 22.55mm, height 15.5mm, width 6.8mm compared to my Regular Toroid I have: OD 34.45mm, ID 20.0mm, height 11.95mm, width 6.85mm
If someone can help explain the difference that would be helpful and appreciated.
Luc
Luc,
I think someone else already explained that the higher permeability is why you are getting more inductance. The material permeability has nothing to do with weight. It relates to how much the magnetic domains rotate when you apply an H-field (magnetizing force) with the coil. Some lighter materials have greater permeability. When the coil applies a magnetic field the core responds by creating a parallel B-field (magnetic field) much stronger then the H-field because it is paramagnetic.
The ratio of B to H gives the permeability. When the core begins to saturate its permeability will decrease until it is the same as air. Materials with hysteresis get magnetized when they approach saturation. When this happens you get (conventionally) energy loss because it takes energy to magnetize and demagnetize the core. You would typically only want to drive your coil to saturation for current regulation or amplification (mag-amp).
Ferrites have very little hysteresis but cores made of materials like metglas or orthonol are designed to have lots of it. These are called strip would cores because they are made from a long metal strip. It is often hard for amateurs to get these because suppliers don't want to deal with them but you can find a few cheap ones at this surplus site:
http://www.surplussales.com/Inductors/FerToro/FerToro-3.html
I can't really say if you would want to experiment with a strip would core because the ferrite is supposed to be more efficient. Maybe someone can buy a bunch of strip wound cores from a supplier and sell them on e-bay? (great biz-op!)
I hope this helps,
Chad.
Hi Luc,
You may want to check the lecture 22 of Professor Lewin.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ddU6HBFlvEk&feature=PlayList&p=A19E8985A925326B&playnext_from=PL&index=7
I found it very informative and helpful.
Because this may be relevant to experimenters here:
According to Paul Lawrance via his blogsite; http://globalfreeenergy.info/
“A tip is that all of my cores show a highly unusual property that is *NOT*
typical. The inductance of a normal core will decrease when placed near
a magnet. The Metglas MAGAMP cores show the opposite, where the
inductance actually increases when placed near a magnet. Of course,
if you place a strong magnet too close, then the inductance shoots
down even in the Metglas MAGAMP cores.
Some quick measurement taken a few minutes ago using the DM4070 LCR
meter on my Metglas MAGAMP cores shows an increase of 1.4 to 1.5 times
typically.â€
My Disclaimer:
Like him, I am concerned about the possibly that the measurement
procedure used by a particular instrument might present a "less than
global†picture about what is going on in the inductor. He goes on to
claim that this behavior in toroids as shown by his equations equates
to the basis of free energy.
:S:MarkSCoffman
Been reading a pdf(below) that show these oppositely wound coils. I shows some different ways of connecting them.
The pdf is a bit cryptic. But the ideas come through after reading a few times.
Luc, I see the circuit you used(its been a while) back then.
No diode. Is there one in the fet for charging the cap?
Just finished winding a toroid your way, but not 5 layers of turns. Trying things.
Mags
Sorry, the file is word(forgot) and is too large to upload. Ill see if I can convert to pdf or zip it tomorrow.
Mags
Here is a link to the doc I could not upload yesterday. Did a search for the title and here it is. Dont recall that I got it at this link. ;] http://www.scribd.com/doc/48568155/FREE-ENERGY-1
Workin on the drive portion. Should have something to try by the weekend.
Mags
Quote from: Magluvin on November 10, 2011, 12:01:19 AM
Here is a link to the doc I could not upload yesterday. Did a search for the title and here it is. Dont recall that I got it at this link. ;] http://www.scribd.com/doc/48568155/FREE-ENERGY-1
Workin on the drive portion. Should have something to try by the weekend.
Mags
I searched google and found down-loadable link : http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=nikola%2Btesla%2Bsecret%2Bfor%2Beverybody%2Bby%2Bvladimir%2Butkin&source=web&cd=6&ved=0CDcQFjAF&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.com%2Findex.php%3Faction%3Ddlattach%3Btopic%3D7679.0%3Battach%3D51278&ei=PbS7ToT4GsrWrQfqiJmuBg&usg=AFQjCNGJieVXn-8XLxUjIwPgwjPAEIsukQ&cad=rja
This is a good video example of 2 opposing coils. ;]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D7QiI8p1gi4
Mags
Quote from: Magluvin on November 15, 2011, 11:34:03 PM
This is a good video example of 2 opposing coils. ;]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D7QiI8p1gi4
Mags
sorry but the video is related to 2 resonant coil there is no connection between the 2 coils.
a good example of opposite coil that work is here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=iJsVSMQqCOM
http://www.hyiq.org/Library/Downloads/Self%20Assisted%20A%20Vector%20Potential%20Oscillation.pdf
Quote from: wings on November 16, 2011, 01:15:35 AM
sorry but the video is related to 2 resonant coil there is no connection between the 2 coils.
a good example of opposite coil that work is here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=iJsVSMQqCOM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=iJsVSMQqCOM)
http://www.hyiq.org/Library/Downloads/Self%20Assisted%20A%20Vector%20Potential%20Oscillation.pdf (http://www.hyiq.org/Library/Downloads/Self%20Assisted%20A%20Vector%20Potential%20Oscillation.pdf)
Hey Wings
I think the vid shows potential, and a different way to use the idea. The outer coils are opposing, whether they are electrically connected or not.
From what I get from reading, even these are connected, via magnetic and electric field. By introducing the coil(lc) on the right, it reinforced the resonance of the coil being monitored by the scope. Check out some of his other vids.
Mags
Hey Wings
Thanks for the info and vid.
Was at lunch earlier and didnt have time to go over them.
Good stuff
;]
Mags
Not sure if this is the best place to post, and I don't want to double post anything; but these experiments from Gotoluc led me to this. Also, I thought maybe some the interesting aspects may help here; I dunno.
I have to flat wound coils from my old Spellman HV that didn't work. There were 4 of these HV coil stacks pulsing at 20Khz and outputting 60kv @ .50ma each. This was then filtered and multiplied with a Cap Diode (Marx) stack to 180kvDC. I show the primary and a crappy drawing of how the coils were layered. I assume some have seen this design before. At, any rate; I used 2 layers from the HV side. They each showed around 73ohms. The wire is 6-8 strand litz woven and the Coil is woven when wrapped!! I just got a well needed meter so I'll get Inductance values for the various wirings. Being flat and separate allowed me to test, tesla pancake, Bifilar, and Opposing winds as you did here. I figured, not having a core; it would be curious if a similar effect could be found. (course smaller). I would not know how many turns are in one layer, but I would guess a couple thousand.
EDIT: I check the Inductance with a Amprobe 37XR-A (not the most accurate and I assume a 1khz pulse for Inductance test). Any way, sitting as connected in video (disconnected from circuit). I show 9mH for each coil (9.04); when I test across the ends (white and yellow) I show 33.34mh ! Seems like this could work then?
At any rate, the video shows running of it. The odd things are; decent low startup with no core, led continually getting brighter rather than a typical JT cap (below led conduction) and it will run (reducing power) and control the led well above rated input? It seems to run the LED at rated brightness for 1/2 the power??
Maybe something similar to what you had noticed? Also,this made me wonder if you could use a JT like circuit to collect the (T2) power for feeding the Mosfet? Maybe you'd still get a little charge back to your main caps?
I do have some thoughts on where this apparent "extra" may be generated, but that's another post, lol. Just wanted to add here, another oddity from using "bucking" or opposing wind coil halves.
Video of JT http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTvnL2HMVow&context=C4c1290aADvjVQa1PpcFPFfx6ZklIUC1rsLOrQVBXU4ajj1gGHw24=
Thanks and good work again with all your videos!
Pic I tried to get a close up of one of the Layer winds for wire used. This is another one of the "layers" but still same HV Litz, etc. You can see a couple single strands in the top left; these have 6-8 strands in them! Also you can see the "weave" to how the single wire was wound inward; very cool!