The Gabriel Device, possible COP=8

[Mavendex]

So does this mean that all we have to worry about is getting the primary field in? 

Maybe when winding the primary, for each turn make wider spacing. This way you can go around the outer shell many times. You can make taps on the primary to make fast adjustments and still be covering the whole shell with powered primary wire.

Naturally it should be wound with more wire than prescribed just to test those boundaries while your at it. Then when you find the sweet spot, cut off the tail.

Hey Mav

I like the idea to us an audio amp to try driving frequencies, with adjust abilities. You can use pc or laptop for a signal gen to the amp, and try different wave forms.

I have an old Soundstream D100 and a Class A 100 Im setting up for this kind of testing.

Hey Forest

Any particular notes we should pay particular attn to?  ;]

Mags

Hey Mags,

I was also thinking that after I get this secondary rewound if the unifilar doesn't work and we are still saturating badly

I was going to use the pc signal gen, into the power amp with 2 channels hook up the coil bifilar and run 60hz thru but try and use a canceling method with phasing just a little and turn my amp turns in to 1/2 amp turns or 1/4amp turns this way we can drive down consumption as well.

while we cut the tail off kick it square in the #^%%$

Mav

[forest]

That was only on one of his early devices.  Later he figured out something that fixed that so they worked either rights side up or upside down.

so ? what do you think it could be ?

[nul-points]

I just tried using the inside coil as the primary and got 1.9VAC on the outside coil.
120VAC input on Outside coil = 12VAC output on Inside coil
120VAC input on Inside coil = 1.9VAC output on Outside coil
Where inside is 304 turns CW, and outside is 80 turns CW

hi all

importfanatik's results** certainly show an asymmetric coupling operation between outer and inner windings

BUT...

i) the asymmetric coupling effect appears to work better when using the inner winding as the primary
(only 2.63% voltage coupling outer to inner;
      6.02% voltage coupling inner to outer)

ii) the efficiency of the transformer appears to be so low that the overall loss greatly exceeds any advantage of the asymmetric coupling! 

(** at this drive level, at least)

===========

CALCULATIONS:-

I/P: 120VAC (Outer as primary)
O/P: 12VAC (Inner as secondary)

turns ratio 80:304 = 1:3.8

120 * 3.8 = 456VAC
(theoretic o/p due to turns ratio alone)

actual  o/p coupling = 12/456 = 2.63% of theoretic

------------------------

I/P: 120VAC (Inner as primary)
O/P: 1.9VAC (Outer as secondary)

turns ratio 304:80 = 1:0.263

120 * 0.263 = 31.56VAC
(theoretic o/p due to turns ratio alone)

actual o/p coupling = 1.9/31.56 = 6.02% of theoretic

============

np


http://docsfreelunch.blogspot.com

[importfanatik]

Thanks nul-points.

I wonder though,..
Im guessing that when people talk about transformer winding ratios, it is usually based on both primary and secondary being wound around the same core, and so the same circumference, apples-to-apples.
Maybe the reason the voltages are so far from what is expected is because of the difference in circumference between the primary and secondary coil windings.
I think your right about my transformer being very inefficient...
But I dont think we can safely say the inner works better as a primary without a formula that takes the difference in circumference into account along with the # of turns.
Just thinking out loud...

[nul-points]

[...]
Im guessing that when people talk about transformer winding ratios, it is usually based on both primary and secondary being wound around the same core, and so the same circumference, apples-to-apples.

Maybe the reason the voltages are so far from what is expected is because of the difference in circumference between the primary and secondary coil windings.

I think your right about my transformer being very inefficient...
But I dont think we can safely say the inner works better as a primary without a formula that takes the difference in circumference into account along with the # of turns.
[...]

hi all - and thanks for the reply, importfanatik

i should say that my previous post was not intended to comment on any personal aspect of a particular build

it's great that you were able to share with us all some early feedback on real voltage data from a replication of this type of device

my post was just intended to get some initial idea of the (off-load?) voltage coupling behaviour of such a device

the asymmetric behaviour of the voltage coupling (inner-to-outer & outer-to-inner) is encouraging

if this type of device is intended to provide useful transformer-type action of at least regular efficiency, however, then it would seem that the (off-load?) voltage readings for a 1:4 turns ratio should give an output voltage which is much higher than 6% of theoretical in at least one direction

the fact that these initial values seem so far from regular transformer behaviour suggests that it is not going to be straightforward for replicators to achieve the sort of efficiencies promised by the early discussions here in this thread

no formula will be necessary if further data from actual builds show that we're not seeing true 'transformer' type action in either direction when the devices can eventually be measured on-load

i'm hoping that my comments will be seen by all as intended - constructive whilst hopefully also realistic

all the best with the on-going experiments
np


http://docsfreelunch.blogspot.com