Tesla's "COIL FOR ELECTRO-MAGNETS".

[synchro1]

Another way the voltage might effect the frequency is by the higher voltage causing more current through the resistance and engaging the core better.

..

I don't see a tank capacitor as an output "load" in itself. It is a parasitic load, similar to the resistance of the wire in the coil.

..

An unloaded tank is a pointless exercise isn't it, as far as output goes.

..

What's your point here, that resonance starves power from the circuit, and that "Lenz delay effect" is a return to normal?

[MileHigh]

Conrad:

I sold the Synchro Coil Joy Buzzer patent to Google Jokes!  We are rich!  lol

I get the impression (when watching a video of these experiments) that the power necessary to drive the rotor is always very much higher than the power generated by the pick up coil.

I think that nearly all of us would agree with that statement.

This "parallel resonance" (pick up coil LC circuit should have the same frequency as the AC generated by the spinning magnets) is just one of the theories involved and might not even be the explanation?

This is true with one caveat.  The passing magnets might be at the LC circuit/pickup coil resonance frequency, but the EMF waveform that they generate in the pickup coil is usually not even close to a sine wave.  You can see the induced EMF waveform in one of Itsu's clips when he disconnects the capacitor and the load.  So the excitation has many higher harmonic frequencies that more or less are filtered out by the LC pickup coil circuit.  You can see how the sine wave on the scope display is quite distorted because of this.

To answer your question in a general sense, if you change the configuration of your motor or pickup coil, then it's reasonable to assume that some parameters will change.  You can look at that as an A-B comparison test investigation.  You also can do a second investigation to see how the change affects were the input power goes as it flows through the motor.  For example, if you make a change, the motor efficiency with respect to (output RPM/input power) might increase.  The average power consumption may also decrease.  Depending on how those variables change between the "A" version of the motor and the "B" version, the rotor can speed up while the power consumption decreases.  The key to understanding this is to do your best to track and measure the "waste power," i.e.; the input electrical power that becomes waste heat power.

So it's possible that pick-up coils in LC resonance give you a more efficient motor for a given efficiency parameter.  You can just try to measure the different electrical, mechanical, heat, and useful output power levels.  That would document what the LC resonance does to improve your efficiency.  You also have the option to do a full timing analysis and actually document and measure exactly what the pickup coil in LC resonance does with a full timing diagram.  That will explain everything and explain what the resonance is actually doing.

Everything I state above is what is "hiding behind the curtain" when people use the term "the delayed Lenz effect."  I believe that the popular notion is that the change in configuration of the motor delays the arrival of the magnetic repulsion on the spinning rotor and therefore the rotor speeds up.  Some may believe that you are getting something for nothing because the power consumption did not increase.  However, perhaps the first assumption before making real measurements would be to assume nothing!  Then perhaps make a basic assumption that the motor became more efficient, and some of the input electrical power that was being lost as waste heat power is now being directed to pumping mechanical power into the rotor and speeding it up.   So:  Less waste heat power and more rotor mechanical power - which is of course an improvement in the performance of the motor.  BUT, you have to make all of the measurements to prove your assumption is true.

MileHigh

[MileHigh]

Farmhand:

I'm intrigued are you saying that you can continually excite a tank to parallel resonance with no input ? This is one of the reasons I usually say at or near resonance.

You may want to check the formulas for the resonance frequencies of series and parallel RLC circuits.  The frequency is probably not dependent on the resistance.  Of course the resistance drains power in the resonator.  You figure if you chose the best type of capacitor with the lowest ESR and a coil with fat wire and not too long a length of wire, you could increase the time constant of the exponential decay of the resonator.  It might even be a fun experiment because you could have a friendly competition for who can extend the decay out the longest.

So for the parallel LCR resonator, the impedance is not infinite like you say.  You can imagine that the AC signal from the signal generator at the signal generator source is always slightly higher in voltage than the resonator voltage at the resonator.  So that means that current from the signal generator is slowly seeping into the LCR resonator to compensate for the losses.  There is a very very slight voltage drop along the length of the signal generator cable due to the current seepage.  If you have a very good LC resonator connected to the signal generator with very low ohmic resistance in the LC circuit, that translates into very high impedance in the parallel LC resonator.  Therefore the current seepage from the signal generator to replenish the resonator will be very low.  So perhaps the voltage drop along the cable will only be a few hundred microvolts.

I am always concious of this stuff.  However, it's understood among the "pros" that you don't have to mention it all the time.  It simply makes discussion easier.

MileHigh

[Farmhand]

I didn't say the resistor itself would change the frequency of resonance. However the extra loading of the tank means there must be input to maintain activity, in practice most loads have some inductance/capacitance and resistance.

Anyway I think we mostly all agree about the folly of the speed up under load effect. I showed what I could, to do what I could to try to improve understanding and save some people some hype disappointment. I certainly do not begrudge others doing the same in their way.

The main thing is I was discerning enough to realize it was BS.

All I can say is many of us have contributed to slaying this false hope.

..

[Farmhand]

My theory about the voltage and the frequency is just that "a theory" that I would need to prove for it to be an accepted theory, If I cannot prove it then I would have to admit it is a flawed theory, so you can sue me then. 

Cheers