Would this test method be of any value? It allows current sensing in the primary ground leg and should eliminate the normal heavy ground loop of the SG.

A suitable wideband isolation transformer for L3, L4 can be made on a small ferrite core, have very few turns at these frequencies and can be designed to have very low coupling capacitance.

We don't have to care about the losses in the wideband isolation transformer because we are measuring on the output of this transformer which is measured input to the DUT. A well designed transformer will adequately reflect the generator impedance or turns ratio can be adjusted to provide a proper impedance match to the DUT (which Vasik suggested could be useful).

It allows sensing input current on the input side, ground referenced, and allows noting coupling capacitance and power leakage to ground through the TBF on the output side sense resistor or that resistor can be eliminated so that you can make a possibly more accurate measurement of output power on the right hand side, as well as input power on the left.

IOW R2 and probe 4 are not really needed with this method. The bottom of the winding on the right can go directly to ground. (ver2)

All scope probes can be star grounded at the schematic ground point.

I'm sure partzman (or someone) has probably tried this and I missed it. If of no value, disregard.

Regards

Carroll:

Read this:

QuoteDo you think people are stupid that not understand what is a transformer and a coil  ? Or you think you are really more cleaver than others  ?
Make something  useful instead of simple create noise, because until now you not add nothing practical and positive to this thread with such behavior.
Do you think you are help anyone at moment ?  To me seems not

Are you saying that there is nothing there?  I count six personal put-downs in that quote.  Don't you?  And that's just a snippet of his first attack posting today.

Here is the truth:  I am saying, "Is the Tesla bifilar pancake coil of any use?"  And that upsets people and they attack me personally.  Because I speak from an alternative viewpoint, people don't give a rat's ass if I am attacked.  If the roles were reversed and I came on like a "bouncer" like Nelson then everybody would be freaking out.  It's a double-standard and that's unacceptable.

At least three or four times I had to post to Nelson, "No more ad hominem attacks."   Then after that he attacked me again, and then again today.   Here is the psychology, "I don't like what that guy is saying so I am going to make postings that demean and degrade him personally."   You can find probably at least 50 examples from Nelson of comments similar to the six that you see quoted above.  He is trying to play the "big man" and "act as the leader of the tribe" thinking that people are going to be impressed by his ignorant uncouth behaviour.

I am not the issue, and that's the real truth.  It's takes character to recognize this and decouple yourself from the whole Tesla fandom thing.  If I make a technical point, I don't expect to be attacked personally, and I am not going to be attacked personally.  If some people reading had the character and courage to tell Nelson to stop, he would probably stop right away.

QuoteBut I have to say I am disappointed that you have taken such a hard stance against some guys that are trying to investigate an anomaly.

I am not taking any stance against anybody trying to investigate an anomaly.  I am assuming that you are referring to Partzman's transformer setup.  I have no clue what you are talking about.  Beyond that, I am just asking some frank questions about the Tesla bifilar pancake coil because they are worth asking.  Yes, it's politically incorrect, but people need to see both sides of a situation and deal with reality.  There are still no answers about the pancake coil.

As far as giving Nelson some slack, I am assuming that you are talking about my comments on his videos.  Look, I am just telling him the truth.  Why does knowledge advancement progress like a glacier on the forums?  It's because very often people won't speak honestly about what they see other people are doing on the bench.  It's always, "That's really cool man."  That's gets you nowhere fast.  There is nothing wrong with simple straightforward comments.  A pair of pancake coils face-to-face make for a lousy air-core transformer compared to doing it conventionally.  That is fact, and people should not get hurt egos for discussing facts.  And if they get hurt egos just the same, they should not turn around and attack you personally over technical comments.

I am not here to bash anyone, and likewise I am not here to be bashed.  And I am certainly not here to be personally bashed when i make technical comments.

There is a temptation to say nasty ugly things about people personally when they make technical comments that upset your beliefs or point of view.  It's like a sickness, and it has to stop.  Argue the technical points and stop attacking people personally.  Every person should have the strength of character and the personal integrity and the self-respect to behave properly.

MileHigh

Quote from: Vortex1 on May 03, 2017, 09:45:32 PM
Would this test method be of any value? It allows current sensing in the primary ground leg and should eliminate the normal heavy ground loop of the SG.

A suitable wideband isolation transformer for L3, L4 can be made on a small ferrite core, have very few turns at these frequencies and can be designed to have very low coupling capacitance.

It allows sensing input current on the input side, ground referenced, and allows noting coupling capacitance and power to ground through the TBF on the output side sense resistor or that resistor can be eliminated so that you can make a possibly more accurate measurement of output power on the right hand side, as well as input power on the left.

IOW R2 and probe 4 are not really needed with this method. The bottom of the winding on the right can go directly to ground. (ver2)

All scope probes can be star grounded at the schematic ground point.

I'm sure partzman (or someone) has probably tried this and I missed it. If of no value, disregard.

Regards

ION,

Your expertise is shining through.  I think it's a great idea to get rid of the ungainly big scope ground and have a very localized ground. The star for the grounds is also great, a classic!  I think that could indeed make for improvements in the setup.

MileHigh

Quote from: MileHigh on May 03, 2017, 10:25:06 PM
ION,

Your expertise is shining through.  I think it's a great idea to get rid of the ungainly big scope ground and have a very localized ground. The star for the grounds is also great, a classic!  I think that could indeed make for improvements in the setup.

MileHigh

Thanks MH, this is just the common sense stuff you try out when attempting to vet a tricky measurement problem. I'm sure partzman and I probably discussed something like it a while back on the phone. I just see trying to measure input power on the output side as fraught with problems, but I could be wrong.

A lot of math capability in the newer scopes allows for all kinds of tricky probe connections, but sometimes it's good to take a step back to what we had to do back in the days when we didn't have that equipment, as a double check.

I feel this device should be tested many ways and if the claim is more out than in, COP>1, then I proposed looping the device with nothing more than a low loss phase correction network since the input and output frequencies are identical. See here:

http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=3445.msg61495#msg61495

The rationale is: any 4 terminal transformer or other black box that is claimed to have a real power gain
by virtue of some magical construction or heretofore unknown principle can be looped very simply as a proof of principle, especially if the input and output are the same frequency as in this particular device. If there are slight phase differences, this can be remedied with a low loss phase correction network. If the input and output impedance differs, this can be remedied with a low loss auto transformer.

By virtue of regeneration, the problem then will become one of limiting and regulating loop feedback so that a runaway condition and meltdown does not occur.

I don't think we have to worry about that yet. 

Kind Regards

Milehigh's post which Nelson responded to .
Miles
Quote
Partzman's testing and attempts at replication are interesting and a worthwhile exercise.  However, this is at best indirectly related to the bifilar pancake coil.  Just look at title of his schematic, "Bifilar Pancake Transformer."  It's not a coil, it's a transformer.  I still encourage this discussion on this thread.

The transformer discussion has pretty much hijacked the real purpose of this thread.  I was leaving it up to the contributors to continue the discussion about the Tesla series bifilar pancake coil.  What unique purpose or purposes does it serve?  What is special about it and what can you do with it?  What practical applications are there for it that specifically require a Tesla series bifilar pancake coil?

So is it real or is it just one of millions of patents that were never used in the real world and the only reason it is discussed is because Tesla's name is on it?

The field is wide open and I hope we hear more than crickets chirping.

end quote
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Miles

Its good you speak for EVo and the purpose of his thread 
the fact that you cannot see the ongoing work being done around the Pancake coils here boggles the mind,
there are ten guys working on Partzmans MEI pancake coil work
and no its not a replication
its his work

and EVO wants it in his thread as well as Nelson's contributions
they are hoping to find out whats special about the pancake coil??



and Nelson says ?

quote
Do you think people are stupid that not understand what is a transformer and a coil  ? Or you think you are really more cleaver than others  ?
Make something  useful instead of simple create noise, because until now you not add nothing practical and positive to this thread with such behavior.
Do you think you are help anyone at moment ?  To me seems not
end quote

and this you call an attack ,one of six or seven such attacks ??

you have got to be kidding??

your post above is much more of an attack, an attack on this thread and its true intent
to find out whats special about Bifilar pancake coils

you try to move the goal posts or tell us what we should really be discussing here ??
the true intent of Evo's thread??
Yeesh



Moderator you can remove this post too