Selfrunning Free Energy devices up to 5 KW from Tariel Kapanadze

[itsu]

Here are some wide bandwidth high frequency linear analog amplifier integrated circuits that are ready to use.
The PA107U is the most powerful HF amplifier IC but it is also the most expensive ($375). The AD8023 is the weakest and less expensive ($11)

Use those if you think that the windings need to be driven by high-power high-frequency non-rectangular analog waveforms. Otherwise two transistor H-Bridge buffer/booster circuits can be used for digital pulses.

@ verpies,

i found 3 TDA6120Q's in my junkbox, and looking to the datasheet they are better then your mentioned TDA6111Q, please confirm.

If so, is the test circuit on page 8 of the datasheet i good start to build?

Regards Itsu.

[verpies]

 @ those attempting to tune the STAAAR Yoke device.

If my hunch is correct than the goal of the tuning procedure is to create a rotating magnetic field inside of the ferrite. See the animation of it here:

two perpendicular coils create magnetic rotation...
See the animation of two orthogonal coil pairs below (click on it to see it rotate):

The animation above uses 2 pairs of windings (4 windings), but it is possible to create the same rotating magnetic field only with 2 perpendicular windings (see the attached picture).

Anyway, to accomplish the above objective, at least two perpendicular windings are needed. If two of them are used then:
1) The two windings need to be perpendicular to each other, in order to create orthogonal magnetic fields (H-fields)
2) The currents flowing in these two windings need to be:
     a) bipolar symmetrical AC waveforms (preferably sine waves).
     b) of the same frequency (preferred ratio) or an integer multiple of the frequency (harmonic / subharmonic).
     c) 90deg. out of phase. This phase difference can be accomplished by one of these methods:
         i) Driving the windings by two separate low-impedance AC voltage sources (signal generators + amplifiers)
            outputting two separate waveforms of the appropriate phase difference.
        ii) Driving both windings in parallel by one AC voltage source.
      iii) Driving one winding by one AC voltage source and relying on the stray mutual inductance to drive the other winding.

Depending on configuration, the STAAAR Yoke device uses methods 2c_ii or 2c_iii, so let's analyze what is needed to maintain the 90deg. phase difference between the current in the windings.

From basic electronic engineering we know that:
1) in an RL circuit the current leads the voltage from 0deg. to +90deg.
2) in an RC circuit the current lags behind the voltage from 0deg. to -90deg.
3) in an RLC circuit the current leads or lags behind the voltage from -90deg. to +90deg.

Again, from basic electronic engineering we know that in an RLC circuit:
A) if the reactance of the inductor is greater than the reactance of the capacitor then the current lags behind the voltage of the AC source
B) if the reactance of the inductor is less than the reactance of the capacitor then the current leads the voltage of the AC source
C) if the reactance of the inductor is equal to the reactance of the capacitor then the current is in-phase (0deg.) with the voltage of the AC source. 

Point C describes the resonance in an RLC circuit.

Note for Newbes: The reactance of a capacitor or an inductor (e.g. coil, winding) changes with frequency and is similar to resistance. Namely, it increases linearly with frequency for inductors and decreases linearly with the reciprocal of the frequency for capacitors.
For DC, an ideal inductor behaves as a 0ohm resistor and an ideal capacitor behaves as an infinite resistance resistor (open circuit).  For very high frequencies it's the opposite...
The impedance (Z)  is the combination of real resistance (R) and reactance (X). Its magnitude can be calculated according to the formula Z=(R²+X²)^^0.5
Those wishing to study this further, look up the "ELI the ICE man" rule and see the attached graph of X_L and X_C.

Each winding in the STAAAR device can be modeled as an RLC circuit according to the attached schematic, where:
Rx is the internal resistance of the AC signal generator
R is the resistance of the winding
L is the inductance of the winding
C is the stray inter-winding capacitance of the winding plus any added external capacitors.

The AC impedance and current phase formulas for this circuit are quite complex, but what’s important, is that in order to achieve the 90deg. current phase difference between these windings:
1) the current in one winding has to lag behind the voltage of the AC source (be more inductive than capacitive, see pt.A above)
2) the current in the other winding has to lead the voltage of the AC source (be more capacitive than inductive, see pt.B above)

For example if current in one winding lags 30deg. and in the other leads 60deg. then the phase difference between them is 90 degrees, because 30+60=90.

Now, in the STAAAR Yoke device, the 50t winding has much higher inductance than the 1t winding which is confirmed by Itsu's measurements.
Thus the current in the 50t winding should be lagging behind the voltage of the signal generator. Conversely, the capacitance should dominate in the 1t winding causing the current in it to lead the voltage of the signal generator.

...and indeed the STAAAR team reports that the device does not work with narrow surface areas of the copper strips (narrow strips have smaller capacitance than wider strips). 
Here, it should be emphasized that in the 2c_iii method of driving the 1t winding, the signal generator does not drive it directly but through a stray mutual inductance between the 1t and the 50t winding.

In summary the whole tuning process of the STAAAR Yoke device might amount to setting the capacitance of the 1t winding and the frequency of the signal generator to such values that the currents in the 50t and in the 1t winding are 90deg out of phase.  According to pt.C, this precludes operation exactly at resonance (in method 2C_ii), because in such case the current is exactly in phase with the voltage of the AC source (signal generator).

The easiest way to measure whether these currents are 90deg. out of phase is to set the scope in XY mode to measure both currents and look for the roundest Lissajous figures. See:
http://www.allaboutcircuits.com/vol_2/chpt_12/2.html

[verpies]

i found 3 TDA6120Q's in my junkbox, and looking to the datasheet they are better then your mentioned TDA6111Q, please confirm.

TDA6120Q has 100mA max output current and TDA6111Q has 5000mA max output current

[wattsup]

Are you pulsing your windings with symmetrical AC waveform or pulsating DC waveform?
In case of the latter - did you try reversing the phasing of your windings ? (some people call it the "winding polarity"...)

@verpies

I will have to see about that when I set up the same tests again. I should have tried that when it happened for comparison.

@all

I degaussed my yoke coil and now I am getting about 20% higher outputs then I got before. The degauss coil (dC) seems to work well even though mine has a greater diameter then @T-1000s. With the ring standing straight and when the yoke is inserted in the center positioned as it would when placed on a table, you can feel the strong vibration of the degauss coil going into the yoke core. I did this until the degauss coil started getting warm. About 2 minutes. I remember my dad would use this on TV screens for not more then 15-30 seconds. I am wondering if @T-1000s degauss coil was maybe home made and would not do a good enough job, they should try to find a real one because it works. In my test case, I had 240volts, then it fell to 130 volts and now after degauss I get around 290 volts.

So, guys doing tests with these yokes should have a few standard settings and results on paper that they can repeat just in case the yoke goes haywire with the HV. But the fact remains that all of us have been using an already used yoke coil. That TV was running that yoke already for how many years? It could be that regardless of the yoke type, Russian, US or whatever, they will all have some coupling loss to varying degrees.

So here is my low level take on this. With the pulsed trio of 1T, 15T and 50T their relational impress on the core is coupled to the 150T as output. We know that when scoping the 150T and pulsing the 15T and 50T, the output waveform is shown by the thin lines of the waveform. We also know that when the 1T is added at the right frequency, the thin waveform line does not change but now becomes thicker and thicker. So if I extrapolate this to when I will be using the FB HV output, the waveform would be the same but so much thicker. One big fat waveform that would just go 5 feet off the scope screen is what I would expect. Now, how that big fat waveform is changed to 50Hz or 60Hz burst will remain to be seen.

I think what we also need is to better understand the original yoke coil functions in its original form when placed on a cathode tube. Maybe someone can provide us with a good layman's explanation of how a yoke works in a TV. Maybe a step by step description on why the yoke has only one sparsely wound bifilar coil per yoke half then the other butterfly coils on the inside that all work on the cathode stem. If we had a better understand of the standard operation, this may give us more insight into how to use it best with the WNY design. After all, they are not called deflection yokes for nothing.

@stivep

Thanks for all your great effort. In the last video of the Caduceus Coil (CC), I have also the same setup and can both insert the ferrite inside my set-up but I can also slide the CC inside the outer wound bucking coil and see all the waveform changes. I never saw an ascending waveform. Is it possible to describe how that was connected to show such a waveform.

wattsup

PS: Sorry for so much rambling. lol

[jbignes5]

 Ok lets look at the last picture there. Put aside all the calculations ok. Lets just look at the picture. coil 1 is the first surface. and it should represent the 1 turn copper strip. When the 1 turn first across the spark gap it fills that area with a longitudinal pulse that acts like a sonar wave filling the inside and outside of the coil with a polarized surface. Once the surface is made we can manipulate the surface to spin to the left or even to the right. This surface looks like when you pull the drain from a full tub. The vortex going down or even up depending on the wind and polarity of the injected pulse. The coils around the ring which is on the same plane as coil 1 allow for one to twist this surface and cause the vortex.
Now what the team has done is put the bifilar coil to pick up the twist just outside of the yoke. This will net them very little. Coil 2 is where we should harvest this tempest and not be attached to the twisting mechanism or drive coils. Tesla moved the receiver coils  lower and made them so he could brake the coils (slow them down, check their motion), they were moving because they mirror or lock into the vortex field. This made him devise a way to run a motor and generate a huge wattage by simply slowing the pickup coil or bringing it out of phase with the vortex field.
When the steady state device returns to equilibrium it is at rest and nearly no current is made. It is only when you break the coil 2 does it want to create current to attain an equilibrium. This is accomplished by millions of little lines that form the vortex cutting the coil 2 setup. This part is normal. It is how every generator works. What is different is utilizing capacitance discharge into the drive coils which spin the vortex at extreme speeds. One could increase the speed of the vortex even further by using those discharges into bifilar drive coils on coil 1. They should also be twins with two sources 90 degrees apart. IT is easier to move something like a valve with two hands instead of one.


Tesla was 100% in thinking that His Patent was the correct and most simplest way to accomplish that. Thats my direction of experimentation. When looking up this device I decided to look at everything he was working on at the time and most of it points back to the patent. Any motor he designed after that tried to improve on the efficiency of the drive motors as pictured in the patent. The motor must be made in the same method as in the patent and he specifically states it! The Patent shows distinct parts but it can be included all on one shaft if you wanted. The Exciter generates the high voltage current in two phases. Then it is injected into the ring via capacitance discharges to create the whirling vortex. Remember all this is rigid on one shaft and the coils in the generator are shorted at this point. It acts like a huge induction motor at that point. As soon as the shorted coils reach their peek he un-shorted them and used the resulting huge pressure to flow into the load or Motor. The motor is actually used as a balance mechanism between the load and generator. If it is lacking it boosts the movement of the field coils of the generator to return to a balance. If the load is pulling to much current the motor will slow the generator coils or reinforce the spin to cut more lines and give more current.


This means if the load needs more current then all one needs to do is slow the internal coils (2) down and they cut more lines. if the current is plentiful then nothing is done and the unit regains balance. This is the steady state part. I think in this case the ferrite or iron acts like a pressurizable channel.


Here is a good analogy. Take a bike inner tube. Fill it with air and we have the working or steady state example. Now clamp your hand on two opposite spots and you have one phase of the drive coils. The clamping causes a pulse through the entire tube. It grows all along the tube and not just in one spot. This one ring is just the drive mechanism. With the addition of a polarizing wave from the copper strip you are reinforcing the surface of the vortex. This increases the strength of the generation as well but in the case of your guys experiment you are not harvesting the vortex directly. You are only trying to harvest the spin of the vortex and loosing out on all the power of the vortex.


In the example of that picture there is vortex above and below the coil 1 and coil 2 would effectively harvest most of the vortex's both positive and negative. The harvest coils must be regular coils and not bifilar I am thinking but that needs to be tested. His patent has no tuning per say because it is mechanical and rigid and if I remember Tesla said it could be made out of junk and still operate well. That is because the fields self orient the device and hold it in that position.


I have gone out and gotten two 1 inch diameter soft iron bars bent into a round shape with Two halves. When the ring is charged it will hold itself together like the Leedskalnin perpetual motion holder. With enough frequency this ring will hold itself together very very tightly. Also when you need to work on the field coils the unit can be taken apart like a clam shell by  de-energizing the ring coils and it should fall apart. The field coils could be worked on with ease this way.

P.s. Here is a quick look at the vortex locked into this aluminum stock: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e1/Aluminium_bar_surface_etched.jpg
There is an excellent example of both fields captured in this picture in the lower right. It looks like a big pine tree.

If you really study the closeup of that lower right structure you will notice that the center line going up and down is sliced. The upper part is very little field in the matter. Comparing it to the lower center field line it looks whole and rounded. This must mean it is a picture slightly on angle taking a slice of the field line. Heat uses this same network to evacuate the material of charges which makes it hot and flowing as does the electrical fields use, one is mobil and the other is constrained by matter. This creates a crystalline appearance but it is merely a copy of the underling order of this network. This network is highly capable of huge density variations. And it shows in the veins it produces in the aluminum ingot after it has been etched.

This is an important clue here to what you guys are missing. This is a 3d wave and not a 2d wave. It must be interacted with in precise angles  and very different currents. One being heavy and the other being very high potential. Use both methods and you can capture more energy then it takes to input one kind. The cheapest in Tesla's opinion was very high voltages because it takes advantage of both swings. One we pay for but yet another we don't. It's our free lunch.

Using discharged capacitance only increases the effect because we are using flow dynamics to amplify the power we supply via a shaped cavity(field coils).

Tesla spent years trying to perfect the capacitor. I think his designs should be used here to facilitate the type of discharge he was using. Oils seem to be condensed network or lack of network in this instance and it's ability to increase the dielectric nature of a device like the capacitor should be used to increase it's capability to contain the voltages we will need.