Acoustic magnetic generator.

[Grumage]

Dear Verpies, Google and all.

I shall have to start this reply with a slight error report!!

I decided to revisit this experiment earlier today and found that some of the signal seen on the Oscilloscope was caused by EM radiation from the Amp and transformer. Undaunted, a leftover Sweetie / Candy tin was pressed into service as an Earth Spike grounded (not supply industry ground) Faraday cage. I was then able to ascertain without any doubt that the Ferrite was indeed generating a signal and not picking up any extraneous signals. The output was a lot weaker than before but resonance and harmonic sub frequencies were all there and in the correct sequence.

Yes there is a "sweet spot" between the core halves !! I found the optimum air gap was 3mm !!

Once again I apologise for my earlier error. I hope that these new findings will exonerate me ?? 

Cheers Grum.

[Grumage]

Dear Google ??

Quote from YT.
Sandeep Kapoor2 hours ago

Hi Grumage. Its very interesting. I made some observations.

1. You exited the core only with piezo and it gave voltage in pickup coil. I am assuming piezo was not connected to input coils.
2. You demonstrated that by adjusting the airgap, a sweet spot is obtained.
3. Piezo must touch the core physically for maximum aplitude of the output voltage.
4. At different input frequencies you got high nodes in the pickup coil. Are these frequencies related in anyway with each other in the ratios of PHI ?

Thanks for sharing. Looking forward to more tests eagerly. BTW verpies directed to this video from overunity dot com.

1. The Ferrite cores were just sat on the Piezo transducer. No, there is no electrical connection.
2. Correct. Around 2.5 to 3mm.
3. Correct.
4. Correct. Verpies did the mathematics some time ago. Although the resonant frequency signature did not alter there were minor resonant points at the "ODD" harmonic scale !! 3.5.7 etc.

Cheers Grum.

[Google]

Thanks a lot Grum and verpies 

Now I derive from this:

1.  if you replace the core by a magnet, you would get a much higher output for the same input power ?
2.  higher the number of turns of the pick up coil, higher the voltage generated ?
3.  thicker the pickup coil wire diameter, higher the amperage ?
4.  stronger the magnet, higher is the output power, for a fixed input power ?

5. If all 4 above are correct, what would limit the max power output for a fixed input power.

6. If all the parameters are optimised, can we get a cop of 1 by this arrangement ?

Best

[verpies]

1.  if you replace the core by a magnet, you would get a much higher output for the same input power ?

Possibly ...or if this particular magnet is not susceptible to acoustic stimulation, the core can be kept with the magnet added as shown here.  Keeping the core has the additional benefit of closing the flux lines in a well controlled magnetic circuit and better guiding the magnetic flux under the pickup coil, because the relative permeability of a magnet is almost 1 and that of a core is usually above 1000.

2.  higher the number of turns of the pick up coil, higher the voltage generated ?

Yes, but voltage is not power.

3.  thicker the pickup coil wire diameter, higher the amperage ?

Not quite. Thicker wire lowers the resistance (R) of the winding and raises the current limit (I_MAX=V/R).  In other words, it does not mean that higher current will flow - it only means that a higher current can flow through a thicker winding.

4.  the stronger the magnet, the higher is the output power, for a fixed input power ?

No, because the output power depends on the magnitude of variation in magnetic flux, not on the absolute level of magnetic flux density.

6. If all the parameters are optimized, can we get a COP of 1 by this arrangement ?

Maybe

[Google]

@verpies, thanks.

That implies, keep the core.
That also implies, the output will depend on flux variation in the core, may be maximisedassisted by a relatively weaker magnet also.
That implies, an efficient piezo which can create vibrations with lesser input power.

Best