Talking about phase...

[Bruce_TPU]

Yep, pictures would be good, Grumpy.  I hope you took some at each of the three stages. 

Others should not be far behind!   

Methinks the controller may slow some down, to add the needed precision.  Except GK, he almost had every tuning imaginable as it was!  LOL

I love this part...the building!  I can't wait to see the electronics Jason and Roberto come up with!

Happy Days!
Bruce

[Grumpy]

Let's get back to the discussion of "phase":

@Bob B:

How close to ideal phase separation (as in 120 degrees separation for three poles, 90 degrees for four, etc.) should or shouldn't it be?  I can use a ring counter or shift register to get the phased signals and then adjust them at each coil to make up for differences in winding/position, etc. - this sounds like the best approach.

Are you reversing the signal polarity like a 3-phase motor or just positive pulses?

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

I got the parts, just need to wire them up.  Pretty simple actually.  Earl posted a circuit on another thread that would be good for experimenting.  Build that and adjust the clock for freq, tune the phases, and hold on to your hat.

EDIT: (Earl's circuits - http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,2582.0.html )

Pictures?  This is so simple to wind - why would you need a picture?

EDIT:  I did not count the windings.  I did not take pictures while winding.  It is easy enough to disassemble when and if the time comes.

[HumblePie]

@Bob B.,

Please tell us how do we 'focus the field inward' for safety as you describe. 

I assume the DB Bias is preferred for battery charging as well.  Does this help in containing or focusing the field? 

Can you tell us more about calculating efficient windings needed for a particular core size and intended load as you mentioned?  Thank you very much for time and patience.

Humble

[Grumpy]

I am trying to be more like the following quote from Bob Boyce on the Oupower.com forum, and encourage everyone else to do the same:

Posted: Fri Jun 29, 2007 7:01 am    Post subject:   

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

I'm glad someone is getting encouraged. Yea, I suppose Lester Hendershot, and the others that successfully replicated his device, made sure they were always nearby to a powerful radio transmitter before tuning their devices to run lights and motors. Must be one hell of a crystal diode radio receiver 

Been there, done that. When I was fiddling with atmospheric energy, I experienced first-hand the typically pitiful amounts of power that could be drawn from RF and atmospheric potential. Unless one had access to a couple of high mountaintops like the Swiss Alps or a few really tall radio towers to string cables between, the current was typically in the microamps. That does not always hold true though. I have witnessed some spectacular discharges and potentials from some of the simplest of radiant energy collectors at times, and not because of nearby thunderstorms. Utility linemen must ground unconnected lines before working on them, to discharge the potentially lethal atmospheric potential, even when there are no nearby energized lines to couple or leak. I guess that means they are only imagining that they could be killed.

I have been on top of remote radio and television towers under construction, where there are no nearby transmitters yet in operation, dozens of miles from the next nearest radio tower, and witnessed first-hand the audible sizzle and visible corona of atmospheric potential from sharp points of metal. I have held electrostatic dissipators in my hands while installing them, and watched these corona discharges continue as the energy passed right through my body from the tower to the dissipators on many occasions. I have been on radio towers, within 50 feet of the top, as they were hit repeatedly by lightning. It was an occupational hazard that one must endure when installing or removing antennas from governmental/commercial radio or broadcast towers, sometimes even during inclement weather. When you spend all day working up on a tower in south Florida, you can't just decide to come down when the weather changes, or nothing would ever get done. And yes, I do still have pictures taken from some of these giant towers 

What's the point in all of this? Simple, unless you actually get your hands dirty building or doing something, you can only speculate and go by what you have been taught, whether it was right or wrong. Am I a scientist? No way. I like to actually build and test rather than use scientific models. If I see a need to test for something, I will. I don't always need to know why something observed behaves the way it does. Sure, I would like to know. But some of my most unproductive time was spent pouring over scientific texts trying to make heads or tails of observed phenomonae. I find it more satisfactory to explore and see how better to make practical use of this, rather than to pour through endless textbooks trying to find politically correct terminology.

Bob

"IronHead" summarized this advice down to three words: "Just Build It!"

[HumblePie]

'K.  Already in motion.  Saftey first like Bob B. says.