ENERGY AMPLIFICATION

[forest]

Mags

Mosfets are so made they won't work of smoke immediately in case of any energy gain

[Magluvin]

Hey Forest
I have worked on some high end car audio amps that use mosfets in a push/pull situation.   When the amp is not drawing from the power supply, the bemf voltages can hard hit the mosfets with fairly high voltages.
Some mosfets have internal diodes. But these can be strengthened by additional external diodes.

Lets say we put a diode in series with the mosfet output or leg, and this would help contain the currents to the lrc by not allowing any back at the fet.   Sound good?    Diodes are sweet things. I would not worry about a .7v drop on the input, even at 50v or 100v.   This stuff is just pouring out of me, I dont know where I get it all from.

But im seeing that maybe the LRC may just absorb a great bit of it. I dunno, but if I fry some, we can make a soup with them.  LOL  yucky.   

But good thoughts. And I just came up with the diode after the fet just now as you presented the possible problem. Keep em coming.  ;]

I will work on these problems tonight, and I think you will be impressed at what the diode on the input cap does for us. I think it will be part of the cutoff circuit as a whole.   But if it is not necessary, possibly an op amp comparator to choose the time of cutoff when the discharge cap gets really low or close to zero. Then use an inline diode to protect the mosfet/fets.

I hope that all makes sense.   

I really want to try and make this work as well as possible before I build. I believe in the function of the lrc, but I need to get the switching down pat to make it happen, and in hopefully in a safe manor.

Mags

[void109]

Maybe we just werent looking close enough.   I took a screenshot of my desktop, zoomed in on the input and output power traces and used photoshop to stack them.  I also decreased the time step so we could get a close look at the waveform of the output.

It looks like while I'm getting 2.5KW on output, with 1.25KW on input, the output is in the form of a damped oscillation(I think that's the right word), so half of the apparent power isnt power.  Which incidentally also points that if you discharge the cap at optimal (0 volts) you get roughly twice the power out.  If I'm interpreting that correctly, still new to the solid state area

[Magluvin]

Very interesting Void. You might be right. Good work.
So we have to aim a bit higher I suppose in order to change that ratio to 4 times the input as seems apparent in my first circuit that it is beyond 4x.   I will look closer at these points you have made from here on.   

And what you have found is good work. It may be depressing if what you found is all we are getting, no matter what level of play.
It is wattage/time that will account for everything.

My screen is 1440x900 and I didnt see the oscillation, yet I should have probably knew it was there due to the filled in look of the output compared to the in. My discrepancy

Anyway, I am gunna get to it after I eat dinner.  Im hungry.     I am going to still work on the switching while I have the ideas in my head.

Also remember that we are charging the cap in a less efficient manor according to Teslas Igniter description. We are just simply dumping the source into the cap. So maybe with his circuit involved, we can lower our input power quite a bit in our favor, while maintaining the same output. =]

Thanks Void

Mags

[void109]

Ya, I did the exact same thing - I was elated to see the simulated results, and yet something was nagging in the back of my mind regarding the fact that the output was a solid color...  More than resolution of your desktop, make sure you change the timestep of the scope in the circuit sim to see the actual output at a resolution you can interpret - its under Options -> Other Options -> Time Step Size.  I just reduced it by a power of 10 and was able to see the damped oscillation.

I think I've been interested in OU research for almost a year now.  I'm becoming accustomed to disappointment!  But it's not a bad thing, I don't believe.  While the knowledge I am gaining is showing me that most of what is presented that looks promising is either due to measurement errors, poor research or even disinformation distractions, it is also securing a tenuous opinion that we have taken a wrong step (or several) over the last century with regard to our understanding of physics.  Perhaps even misled, which sometimes seems far more likely.  But if we can recognize this misstep, we can correct it, and I am more convinced today than I was initially that there is an answer waiting to be discovered.