Selfrunning Free Energy devices up to 5 KW from Tariel Kapanadze

[ronotte]

Hi T-1000, wattsup,

lets see if I have well understood, if you feel I'm wrong please do correct and/or insert more details. T-1000 (thanks very much)  is proposing an alternative to their (WNYg group)TC coil based ionization device. This new idea of an  'autogenerator' appears great as it does leverage directly onto existing TBC...so getting away from building huge TCs, and so easing the device's  building & testing, not to speak about the increased safety for the operator!

To summarize the new oscillator design uses the same tube (EL500 or similar beam tetrode tube) in Armstrong (plate tuned C7-L9) standard configuration (I played in the very past with it while building Rx and TX Ham devices): hence nothing weird here. The max sinusoidal oscillator output is then about 300V.

The juice comes from the ferrite transformer arrangement that follows basically same criteria used for the previous Ionization device. So, the 300V sin wave developed by the L9-C7 @ 16KHz (I call it as primary) is then transferred  both via interwinding capacitance (L9/L10 - L11) and inductively to the  first secondary resonator composed by L11 - C9. Considering that C9 only 47pf it is clear that L11 is made to quasi auto-resonate to 16 KHz (or his 3rd harmonic, a look at Pat. US3665288 is mandatory just to know what level of optimization idustry reached many years agò): in fact L11 (pin 7,8) is a big 435turns coil on ferrite core and needs only a small cap in order to bring it into full resonation. To reassume L11-C9 develops a bigger voltage due to circuit Q. Assuming a low Q for various kind of losses, there is anyway an increase in voltage that should be at least by a factor of 4-8...(T-1000 could explicit the real measure and hence the found Quality factor). Lets say Q=5 than about 1.5KV for 1st secondary.

Said 1.5KV should be quarter wave amplified by part of L11, L12 -L13 put in serial resonation via interwinding stray capacitance. Final output voltage considering a Q factor between 20 -30 gives 20 - 30KV or more.

In our real case all becomes difficult to calculate as there is the ferrite (unknown characteristics) core to take into account and all the existing stray capacitance between windings, direct & reflected loads/losses,etc.

TENTATIVE 1/4 wave design
For sake of simplicity I report here what would be the case for air core coils...like for example for TC coils and katchers.
Considering that half wavelength associated to 16KHz is 9375m the 1/4 wave length = 4687m, considering also a velocity factor for 0.15mm insulated wire K=0.90 (?) (0.92-0.95 for coax), we have 4218m (for the second secondary wire length, the one that would provide the needed HV @ 16KHz). Voltage multiplication factor depends mainly on coil Q and various associated losses but generally between 10 - 30 times.

In our real case the manufacturer probably tentatively found the quarter wave length, considering:

- L11 8,9 = 186turns
- L12   4 x 30 = 120turns
- L13  16 x 30 = 480turns
Total for second secondary = 786turns

For a medium diameter of 4cm it corresponds to 3.14 * 4 = 12.56cm and a total of 12.56 * 786 = 19650cm =
196.6meters
You see that 196.6m is far from 4218m...the difference should be attributed to ferrite core presence but the manufacturer could also have considered a resonation scaling factor of 16 (instead of 4).

All considered I should advice to wattsup to simply use the target figures provided by osiakosia...as they are of course already optimized. Better would be to prior test the circuit using an existing TBC110nA: that's the reason I asked it to osiakosia. At the moment I'm waiting to receive the ordered EL500 & socket.

Correction: I have seen only now that Osiakosia reported the following:
"...The  old TBC were tuned to third harmonics of retrace pulse of deflection system . It was about 150-175 kHz . The rezonanse frequency of TBC110LA is 150kHz . The US patent show similar adjustments at US flyback's ..."
hence, scaling to 150 KHz, the 1/4 wave lenght is 450meter that is much nearer to TBC110nA's 196 meters secondaries...

Roberto

[frantz]

Hi All,
maybe we are looking in wrong way. Maybe this way will be better:


[size=78%]http://www.scribd.com/nikhil_aggarwal_33/d/58395441-Exp2-Magnetic-Amplifier[/size]


Watch on page number 8.


For me looking exactly like TK 2004 movie. Plus inductor.


And,
for example, if we don't want to use ferromagnetic core we should to use HV for controlling "transformer" to have the same effect.
Air is some kind of core too. And can to have some saturation.... I don't know yet.




Regards
Frantz

[bolt]

Question : Is it possible to keep unloaded resonant circuit with circulating 25 amps at 200-400V with just a 100W input

YES very easy the problem is extracting the VARS to WATTS without changing the phase angle.  For the last FIVE years i have spoken about VARS and reactive power systems is the road to OU but only the last months the populous is coming to terms with the technology.


A 3 phase 5hp motor can be RV'd and run on just 15 watts!  It will have couple hundred volts and >20 amps circulating


By using loose magnetic coupling of several stages greater source to load isolation can be provided to limit the phase shift.

[wattsup]

@T-1000, @ronotte, @Osiakosia

Thanks for all the inputs. This is really getting into the meat of the flyback and overall devices but I am still somewhat lost and have a few questions so that there is no possibility for any ambiguity.

First off thanks to @ronotte for clarifying some of your observations and also to @Osiakosia for putting some known techniques on the table and then to @T-1000 for your great information.

But, and there is always a but, I am getting the feeling that we want to make A but are being proposed B. Making A means trying to replicate the Lithuanian flyback as it is/was produced coming from the original manufacturer. So here are some questions to get all the intents on the table to then make the right decisions based on solid information.

I know this is taking up some time for everyone but as I have already put products on the market in the past, (have only one product now called NanoCarb dot com - lol   Sorry not really looking for any publicity but just wanted to show this is not my first foray with manufacturers) I know at this stage if anything is left to chance, it will rebound in a bad way later on. Also, the manufacturer must have complete build instructions that eliminate any possible mistakes.

So............. These questions are all relative to @T-1000 last posted diagram and reference very well by @ronotte.

Also, to simplify coil descriptions I would like to suggest that when you talk about the primary, well we know it but when you talk about the secondary, this should be only about those coils wound over the primary even if they are being used as a primary and then anything on the HV coil should be termed as HV. This way when you say "secondary" we know it is those coils over the primary side regardless of what they are used for.

Q1: Is the @T-1000 diagram showing.......

a) the TBC110LA Lithuanian flyback as it is originally made, including the primary, secondaries and HV coils, or,

b) is this flyback design a recommended design that is proposed by @T-1000 as a trial basis to be used with the rest of his circuit diagram.

Basically does the original flyback have the same CW/CCW in the HV coil. This I need to know so that we understand that we will not be making the original flyback or we are making the original flyback. I know I may be passing as a rather stupid guy if all understand what it is but I prefer to have it explained in simple and direct terms to not make any mistakes and to know in advance what we are getting into here.

Q2: OK the HV coil is showing to have two windings L12 and L13 that will be placed on the opposite core end versus the pri/sec core end. Which HV coil is wound first, the 4 layer or the 16 layer?

Q3: Which ever is wound first, is there a preferred direction left-right or right-left.

Q4: Let's say 4 layer is first wound CW from left to right and 16 layer is wound CCW from left to right. Which wires are supposed to be either...

a) connected together inside the coil.
b) if they are not connected together inside the HV coil are they just left open ended inside the coil.

1) 4Left - 16Left
2) 4Left - 16Right
3) 4Right - 16Right
4) 16Left - 4Right

This has to be very clear for the manufacturer.

Q5: In the diagram we see at L13 and end of L12 where @T-1000 mentions a "virtual capacitor". Is there anything physical that has to be added there when winding the HV coil?

Q6: @T-1000 mentions HV "cold" or as I put it HV- exits at L11 pin 7, when in the previous diagrams, the HV- exited at pin 4 with all coils 4-9 in series. This now means there is no need for the coil 6-7. Do we still need to have that coil 6-7 wound on the secondary side and just leave it open, but that would mean this flyback is not the Lithuanian original design. Hmmmm.

I  guess the main question here is is this flyback design with 1/4 and full wave (now I understand it) dual inverted HV coils is based on the original Lithuanian design. If it is, great going and let's move ahead. If it is not, do we still need to make the original just in case. Don't know yet.

The only other information I would really need is physical measurements of the TBC110 flyback, core dimensions, thickness, etc, so the manufacturer can draw off the same or approximate core type.

wattsup

[27Bubba]

@frantz

Very interesting. Thanks for sharing.