Well apparently Rosemary is being dismissive of an attempt to discuss the MOSFET and related capacitance effects and calling the discussion "absurd" on her new blog.  So she is putting up a blocking obstacle for herself.

She is very much a technical Luddite when you venture past a very basic (and I mean _very_ basic) discussion of what's going on.  Part of it is that capacitance is a stumbling block for her, she doesn't understand it.  (Inductance too for that matter.)

There was an exchange with a new member on the blog today, I assume most of you read it.  It's very very discouraging, and reading between the lines you could sense the steam rising off the top of of her head.  (Just like that robot in that original Star Trek episode.)

Abandon hope all ye who enter into the the world of Rosemary and the Zipons.

@EA: I think that two nested coaxial cylinders, properly sized and driven ( and with little longitudinal "splits" to make them Cs instead of Os), would allow nearly full and uninterrupted power transfer and free rotation around the axis.

With loops, it seems that in the near field "SNM" the transfer is not too sensitive to relative orientation of the loop antennae, but at larger distances there are quite definite (and useful) null positions where no power is coupled, and slight changes or shifts or rotations produce much larger or full couplings.

I understand that the monorail system at DisneyWorld in Florida uses a similar power transfer/levitation system, and the train is throttled by mechanically moving the pickup coil closer or farther away from the transmitter coils embedded in the concrete rail structure. Elegant, simple, reliable, and safe.

Marko's video that you linked is the one that inspired me to begin this project.

TK,

That is all good news.

Distance would be no more than 1" necessary.

Ring and cylinder mounted at 90, two nested cylinders, or two rings in parallel are all viable options. I guess the tricky part with nested cylinders will be in calibration because the cylinders separation distance is not variable like the ring sections. Once the sweet spots are identified through trial and error the optimal dimensions will become known, and easily manufactured.

Interesting...

ETA: I've been referring to the Tx and Rx loops as "antennae" but I don't think that they really are best viewed that way. The wavelength of the oscillations is on the order of 300-400 meters !! So a quarter wave loop antenna for that frequency would be rather unwieldy.

I think this means that the system will be relatively unaffected by exact size and shape of the loops. My "black box" version uses a nearly rectangular loop for the receiver, mounted in the same plane, around all the Rx circuitry, and the Tx loop is a bent oblong shape, to fit in the box, also parallel to the Tx circuitry and essentially wrapped around it.

TK,

Sorry to trouble you, but could you repost that capture of hers that shows the drain voltage if you have it handy?

I wanted to take a quick look at something and will have to dig for it.

Thanks,
PW