Partnered Output Coils - Free Energy

[Void]

MileHigh, MarkE:  From what I understood, you both previously made some comments to me that when I measure phase shift the standard way
in the primary circuit of a transformer setup, that the phase shift I measure may not be correct under certain conditions. I assume
that you are talking about something other than just the phase shift that can be introduced by a CSR that contains some inductance,
as that is a given. Can you please explain what you mean? I am reattaching my drawing which shows the way I am measuring the input power,
which is the standard way to make such measurements in an AC circuit.

All the best...

[MileHigh]

Chris:

Seems OU.com have come scavenging for data! Hahaha gotta laugh 

It also seems that a good 99% of them have not read the Data I have provided or Watched the Videos I have provided! They have it all wrong!

E.G: Not all power is consumed as heat, more is returned to the source, thus the term "Choke", reducing Current, than is consumed as heat especially with Inductors. Power can be, and is recycled! For Example: LC Resonance, the Capacitor and or the Inductor do not Consume all of the Power and convert it to heat as much as they recycle it! This is Resonance! This way of thinking is Non-Sense and is just out right wrong. An inductor is a Passive component and "Some" heat is radiated.

Their Fantastic Measurement Hero's over there, are, well "confused" at the figures. Picowatt is the only one on the ball, but he's not experimenting! Maybe they should think about removing some of the Human Error Issues and simplify it a bit? Or just admit defeat, they just cant do it without me!

Maybe I should hold back for a while and let them sweat?   

We are on track here and some reps here are way beyond the guys over at ou.com!

I am honestly not sure what you are talking about.  So if you have something to say... then just say it.

No Batman riddles, no secret decoder rings, just say it plain and simple.  You can even post it here, I am sure you still have your account.

Yes, you're right, because I feel sorry for them! Circuits I have already shown here are solutions to some of Conrads problems!

You are welcome to say anything you want to say to Conrad to help or clarify things.  I don't mean to speak for Conrad, but I am sure that he would not disagree with me.

As far as resonance goes, you state this:

Page: 24 of v2.4 - "I seem to get a better result if the Input is resonated for example, LC Tank.

In 2.5 you say this:

I seem to get a better result if the Input is resonated for example, LC Tank. I believe this is due to
feed-back and or feed-forward in the coils. There seems to be a time constant in the Magnetic Fields
of the Partnered Secondary Coils that appear to play a factor in the Operating Frequency.

I honestly don't get it.  What circuit and configuration is this supposed to apply to?  What is supposed to resonate?  Where is the tank circuit?  What should you see on the input, voltage, current, and power?  What should you see on the output, voltage, load resistor, and the associated power?

MileHigh

[MileHigh]

MileHigh, MarkE:  From what I understood, you both previously made some comments to me that when I measure phase shift the standard way
in the primary circuit of a transformer setup, that the phase shift I measure may not be correct under certain conditions. I assume
that you are talking about something other than just the phase shift that can be introduced by a CSR that contains some inductance,
as that is a given. Can you please explain what you mean? I am reattaching my drawing which shows the way I am measuring the input power,
which is the standard way to make such measurements in an AC circuit.

All the best...

Void:

I will be honest with you that my comment was very very generic.  Something like if you accidentally touch part of your circuit and you notice that the signal on your scope shifts in phase, stuff like that.

But let me revisit something I think I said before.  I am quite sure that you are aware that the LEDs draw a lot of current when the voltage increases.  I think that you see that on the waveforms for the secondary.  I think your frequency is very high, I can't remember exactly.  I thought that the current waveform on the primary was strange looking.  So my main suggestion is to slow everything down a lot.  Do you still get the OU measurement at lower frequencies?  Does the primary current waveform look more like you would expect at lower frequencies?

I also seem to recall that on your secondary waveforms, there was a big phase shift between the voltage and the current.  Why is that the case?  It doesn't seem to make sense.  Again, what about at lower frequencies?

As a general statement, when the frequencies get very high, you have to do some pretty exotic tricks with your scope probes and you need to build your circuit on top of a copper ground plane and stuff like that.  I don't think that you are that high in frequency, I am just mentioning it as a point of information.

MileHigh

[Void]

Void:

I will be honest with you that my comment was very very generic.  Something like if you accidentally touch part of your circuit and you notice that the signal on your scope shifts in phase, stuff like that.

But let me revisit something I think I said before.  I am quite sure that you are aware that the LEDs draw a lot of current when the voltage increases.  I think that you see that on the waveforms for the secondary.  I think your frequency is very high, I can't remember exactly.  I thought that the current waveform on the primary was strange looking.  So my main suggestion is to slow everything down a lot.  Do you still get the OU measurement at lower frequencies?  Does the primary current waveform look more like you would expect at lower frequencies?

I also seem to recall that on your secondary waveforms, there was a big phase shift between the voltage and the current.  Why is that the case?  It doesn't seem to make sense.  Again, what about at lower frequencies?

As a general statement, when the frequencies get very high, you have to do some pretty exotic tricks with your scope probes and you need to build your circuit on top of a copper ground plane and stuff like that.  I don't think that you are that high in frequency, I am just mentioning it as a point of information.

MileHigh

Hi MileHigh. Thanks for the clarification. Yes, I am aware that at higher frequencies the fields from wires and
coils and transformer windings can feed into the scope probe and scope probe leads and alter phase measurements.
I test for this by moving the scope probe leads around to see if the phase shift displayed on the scope shifts around
at all as I change the scope probe leads positions. I also try to connect the scope probes in such a way that the probe leads
are away from the circuit coils and transformers and wires as much as possible.

I ran my test at 280 kHz. That odd effect I was measuring is frequency dependent however, which shouldn't be surprising as impedances
and phase shift are all frequency dependent. Yes, there are usually quite noticeable current pulses in a primary when driving
LED loads, but the way I have connected in the transformer windings seems to cause these current pulses to be cancelled out quite
a bit. That's the intent of the transformer winding arrangement however. This approach doesn't appear to be too practical however
as the power available to drive a load is only very small. I will be running further tests to see if I can find a way to scale up the
performance to more practical levels.

The reason the output LEDs are showing such a large phase shift may well be due to the type of LEDs I am using. They probably contain
a fairly significant amount of internal capacitance, which at 280 kHz is causing the leading phase shift in the current going into the LEDs.
I was just using LEDs as a load because they provide immediate visual feedback on how much power they are consuming while
I am making tuning adjustments.

All the best...

[conradelektro]

MileHigh,

good that you corrected my RMS calculation. I again made an error and confused Vm "peak Voltage value" with Vpp "peak to peak Voltage value", therefore I did not divide Vpp by 2. As you mentioned the correct calculation is Vrms = Vm / sqrt(2) or Vrms = Vpp / 2 * SQRT(2). I hope I learned it now for sure.

And also, yes, I should be more careful with terminology (like "power dissipation" and "power transferred into the primary coil").

.................................................

If your scope does not have the banana jack for the ground, then you connect one or both of your ground clips for your signal probes to the bottom of H1 and you get the same results.

Either way, doing it like this means you don't have to think about moving the ground clips of your scope around every time you want to make a measurement.

MileHigh

I will remember this way of effecting a GND connection to a scope when I do measurements. Thank you for explaining it.

Conrad:

Okay, we are going to review the business about moving the resistor from the ground line to the AC-output line of the function generator.  You posting is quoted below and I also attached your marked-up graphic.

I did not discuss this earlier because it was not that important at the time and I did not want to interrupt your process.  Now is the time to talk about it and the reason goes back to the fundamental principles of getting a proper understanding of what is going on and also not to lead ourselves down a garden path.  These are very important principles.

.............................

Here is the issue:  If there is a "AC wobble" on the bottom of the primary coil because the resistor is on the ground line, this in theory will not directly affect the potential difference you can measure across the secondary coil.  The secondary is completely floating and separate from the primary.  For example, there is no real potential difference that you can measure between the bottom of the primary and the bottom of H3 because there is no electrical connection between the two entities.  When I say this I am intentionally ignoring any possible capacitive coupling effects.

................................

But, to bring it all back home.  From what I see at least on paper, there was nothing wrong with having the R1 resistor on the bottom on the ground line.  In theory all of the measurements can be made with no problems with ground loops, etc.

MileHigh

Thank you for explaining the "AC wobble".

In theory, as I understand now, the position of the shunt R1 in front or after the primary H1 should not have mattered. But in my set up it did cause strange effects. I only got consistent measurements after I change to having the primary H1 on the bottom on the ground line.

Initially I thought it should be like you say, but because I got such strange results (also in the "normal transformer situation", when only one of the partnered output coil was used) I changed the position of the shunt R1 and the measurements became consistent.

I can not say what caused this. Capacitive coupling effects are unlikely at 2 kHz. I have to redo this measurement with your explanations in mind. It could be an effect linked to my function generator, may be it better supports an "AC wobble" at the signal side than on the GND side of its output (but this would also be strange).

I think that a function generator should not be used as a "coil driver", just as a "signal provider" and the signal should be amplified with a transistor (and a power supply) when driving a coil. The precise signal from the function generator can be easily distorted when driving a load.

Greetings, Conrad