Storing Cookies (See : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding

User Menu

Custom Search

Author Topic: ENERGY AMPLIFICATION  (Read 3509728 times)

Magluvin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5884
Re: ENERGY AMPLIFICATION
« Reply #7890 on: February 20, 2017, 07:21:32 AM »


He's not "turning the motor off and on"


Doesnt the pat say so?

Mags

Magluvin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5884
Re: ENERGY AMPLIFICATION
« Reply #7891 on: February 20, 2017, 08:25:28 AM »

Quote:


"The other terminal, as A, connects with a second brush K, bearing on the controller, so that the current which passes through and operates the motor is periodically interrupted."


"The circuit including the motor is of relatively high self-induction, and this property is imparted to it by coils of the motor, or, when these are not sufficient, by the addition of suitable choking-coils, so that at each break of the motor-circuit a current of high electro-motive force will be developed for charging the condenser, which may therefore be small and inexpensive."


End quote.




Yes Magluivin,


Twice! 


You people listen to everyone except the ones who have done the fucking work!  You want to progress, learn to recognize those who have a clue from the clueless!

I know this. Smoky was disputing it so I figured he didnt read it, so I asked.

Mags

Magluvin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5884
Re: ENERGY AMPLIFICATION
« Reply #7892 on: February 20, 2017, 08:51:43 AM »
Just a clarification on my part....

The Ozone circuit is the same as the Igniter circuit, except for the cap charging through the primary. In the igniter the primary is not inline with the large inductor while charging the cap. Not sure what the significant difference would be of the 2 circuits.


Mags

DivByZero

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 1
Re: ENERGY AMPLIFICATION
« Reply #7893 on: February 20, 2017, 08:23:22 PM »
My Dogma...


The cap is the fulcrum of the system because:

    +    It is charged in series with the primary......


    +    It is discharged in parallel with the primary......



Fundamentally you are dealing with the same components, however, you must recognize that you are dealing with two distinct circuits, circuits operating at different instances, circuits which owing to their specific relations CANNOT oscillate at the same frequency, circuits which owing to the aforementioned are not operating in phase! 


Your eyes have been shut to the true nature of this and just about every other circuit Tesla has preserved.  You only see half of a whole.  You only see the parallel LC, you dont understand what the parallel LC is.  Most assume  when you have L and C you must tune.  Just because you can doesn't mean it's what you are supposed to do.

Ok, I'm still stuck at this post. "Fulcrum", sounds almost like a "ground"? Erfinder, can you elaborate on this?

sm0ky2

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3948
Re: ENERGY AMPLIFICATION
« Reply #7894 on: February 20, 2017, 08:57:21 PM »
Yes I read the patent
And the associated patents that are referenced therein
There is two drawings associated with it
And much more text than can fit in the uspto web index.
Most copies of his patent are truncated shortly after the
Numbered claims. Tesla goes on for a good minute in
everything he writes.


In particular, in his discussions concerning the dc motors
Wherein he describes what's going on inside.
The disruption occurs always. That's what makes the motor work.
The G brush takes the current from the disrupted field coil
And dumps it in the cap instead of into the air as emf, like a normal
motor.
Taking this out of the circuit doesn't stop the disruption
It stops the collapse from collecting in the cap.
There are other ways to do this, as described in his other patents.


We can tear apart word for word, but he clearly states that the motor
is connected by any ordinary means, then placed into the circuit.
The "circuit controller", which contains the motor brush G
Times the field collapse of the motor with the charging of the capacitor
This happens during the disruption
When the commutator inside the motor dumps the field to allow
continuous rotation.
The data sheets of every modern motor have all the info we need
The same variables they use to determine the motors rpm
The same motors can be made to run at a different rpm
By simply changing the geometry of an armature or the commutator


In "dc" terms constant current flows from the source
The duty cycle is 100% -( a fraction of time between the breaks)
If you add up the surface area of both commutators
You see that it is (almost) always on.


Electromagnetically, there is a high frequency a/c response.
He is taking the a/c which already occurs inside the dc motor
and dumping it out into the cap through the low self induction
of the primary.
The air gap in the primary circuit which dumps the cap to ground
Is on the face of the rotating disk.
Brush (inverse) commutator G is on the rim.


Assuming a bilateral internal commutator, and its' mirror image externally
The capacitor sees a high potential field collapse 4 times per rotation
The simplified rotary spark gap arcing twice, but knowing Tesla, nothing
is ever simplified so he probably used 4 arc points on the disk face.
To keep everything in resonance with the motor.
Then the gap distance and motor rpm could be set to whatever you desired.
Which he hints about in this patent and more thoroughly describes in others
that use this same set-up.
This is echoed by the second photo in which we see half the number of
commutations and half the inductance on the field coil.


The dc motor is always on,
The current flowing though it
Is disrupted (technically). This is always the case.
But the motor is on. it's the same as a normal dc motor.
If you put dc motor and battery on a scope
You can see the a/c frequency
But no one generally cares about that because we
throw it away to improve motor efficiency
Tesla is simply using that which is thrown away
as a high frequency circuit driver.
Storing it in a capacitor
And stepping up the voltage when it discharges
Through the secondary.
Which, in this device, ionizes the gas between the plates
as a factor of the charge potential, the volume of gas, and
the materials constants of the gas, and gas in general.
pressure is ambient in this example, so standard equations apply
with adjustments for temperature and altitude.
This can be used to mathematically calculate the plate distance
By knowing the max charged a/c potential
Instead of trial and error changing plate distances and fan speed
If your goal was to in fact "produce ozone" or perform similar
electrochemical reactions.


For the sake of discussion we can throw the secondary into a
category called "ok now that we have this, what do we do with it?"
The secondary can be anything from radio broadcast, artificial lightning,
High rpm, low torque motors, or a way to destroy bridges and skyscrapers
with little more than a 9v battery.


Understand we have today high frequency signal generators
That can do a much better job that these 100yr old tricks.
It's really not any different than our modern solid state ionizers
Except that Tesla operated by inherently different values when it comes
to energy consumption.
Tesla designed his circuits to amplify as they performed work.
Our modern engineers design circuits to consume the energy as work.
What is not work, disappears as heat and emf.


Tesla says that if we used it all, it would all be 100% dissipated as heat
in the wiring and nothing would be send further down the line.
And as work


But how does that work?
Isn't that ou? We have extra heat ?
No
Because thermodynamics views this as two independent systems.
One system energy goes in and performs work
And energy goes out to the source.
In the other energy comes in turns into heat
And energy goes out to the source.
The laws apply as intended.
Since the source is the same source, and both the work circuit
and heating circuit are thermodynamically 'legal'
The result is more energy is used from the source before returning
to the source.
Not an increase in efficiency in terms of energy in and out
The efficiency of both systems combined is actually less than the
efficiency of either system by itself.
But rather an increase of consumption of the (normally wasted)
Energy flow.


The Ozone maker is no different. It is a Load that receives a portion of the induction
through the primary. The rest is just dumped across the capacitor.
If the secondary were connected to a heating coil it would be the same.
In a sense, this is an old version of the 3-battery charging system.


It's really all irrelevant since we can just connect the primary to a
signal generator or timer circuit, with enough inductance to make it spark across a gap, or
other equivalent variable impedance/capacitance.
And inductor with a variable capacitor
Or capacitor with variable inductor
Can be tuned to perform the same function
It's right about (but not exactly) that point at which the time of induction precisely coincides
with the timing from the charging source.
This is a frequency at which you will see amplitudes increase across the circuit
Impedance through the primary decreases
Voltage induced through the secondary increases
And your Ozone plates should work very well.


We can of course, just drive a transformer with the signal generator and make Ozone.
Open up an ionizer and you will most likely see an hv transformer or a voltage multiplying
capacitor bank.
But that would be UnTesla in nature and will not result in more usable power.


wattsup

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2606
    • Spin Conveyance Theory - For a New Perspective...
Re: ENERGY AMPLIFICATION
« Reply #7895 on: February 20, 2017, 09:59:41 PM »
@sm0ky2

I think the tokey smokey was a little too much.

First off, there is no spark gap in the ozone patent except on the secondary to produce the arcs that fracture air into ozone.

Also, the fan motor commutator is not a slip ring. There are no slip rings in the patent.

How I described the  function is how it works. No one will find a better function mode and saying the capacitor charges is wrong. There is no capacitor charge. The capacitor is always connected in series with the fan motor so it cannot charge and notice there is no diode anyways to hold a charge let alone have it discharge and that's one of the reasons the capacitor can be small. The rotary switch when closed can only rebias the primary from it's original biasing but always on the positive side of the potential. No negative potential ever reaches the primary SO THE SOURCE BATTERY OR OTHER CANNOT SEE IT AS POWER CONSUMPTION.

The elegance of this is very simple and could basically be summarized by the saying "Expend a little energy to run a fan motor and produce ozone in series for free". If Tesla said it this way then, he probably would never have gotten his patent.

@Magluvin

You make a good point about the source voltage levels but that does not change anything in the function besides the primary to secondary turn ratios because your main target is to reach a level high enough to produce ozone.

When Tesla says a small capacitor can be used in this system, that's because the primary has practically no inductance so very little effort is required to change the potential over the primary. You do not need a capacitor discharging and the capacitor in any case cannot hold a charge because it is always in series with the fan motor.

When the rotary switch closes, the feed source does not fall to zero volts because of the inductance in the fan motor does not present a true short condition. Also when it is closed the positive cannot short on itself from the positive of the capacitor. BUT THE RAPID CHANGE IN THE "DIRECTION" OF THE POSITIVE POTENTIAL IS WHAT IS CREATING THE CHANGE THE SECONDARY NEEDS TO PRODUCE OUTPUT. LIKE I SAID THE SECONDARY DOES NOT CARE ABOUT HOW THE CHANGE OCCURRED, ONLY THAT THERE IS CHANGE AND IT HAS THE ABILITY TO TRANSLATE THAT SINGLE POTENTIAL CHANGE INTO A DUAL POTENTIAL OUTPUT SIMPLY BECAUSE OF ITS OWN TOPOLOGY.

When the rotary switch then opens, you do not even have flyback because the change only occurred on the positive side of the potential and again the fan motor is always connected, never disconnected from the main series line.

Man oh man, don't know why this is so complicated. Tesla is a genius. He made a fan motor that can run the ozone part for free. What else do you want? He just mechanically simulated a single polarity H-bridge.

Maybe in a few years when all this sinks in, some will catch on but for now guys will just keep crackin the egg.

If anyone has a better function mode then put it up in a logical manner and I will come back and ask you questions on how your logic is possible or not. But your explanation has to be methodical otherwise things get mired up in misunderstandings and heads start to swell and blow up.

So to start to get your brains going remove the primary and the rotary switch from the patent and tell me if the fan motor will rotate or not when the feed supply is connected. Yes or No?

wattsup

PS: Some have caught on but many have not.

shylo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 540
Re: ENERGY AMPLIFICATION
« Reply #7896 on: February 20, 2017, 10:32:33 PM »
I think it's just about bouncing the input against  Lenz ( the reverse).
There will always be a spot , where you have to input, to keep it going.
The motor coils send a spike back at the supply, and if the interuptor is closed at the time ,to the rest of the circuit.
The spike is not enough.It helps.
Just trying to incorporate it all together.
artv

wattsup

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2606
    • Spin Conveyance Theory - For a New Perspective...
Re: ENERGY AMPLIFICATION
« Reply #7897 on: February 21, 2017, 01:49:45 AM »
@shylo

There cannot be a spike sent back because the fan motor commutators are using overlapped brushes which means there is never a period where nothing is connected and being overlapped means before it leaves one segment it is already in the next segment. Take any dc motor and scope it. No spikes. Inductors only spike or discharge when they are disconnected and in this patent the fan motor, weather the rotary switch is closed or not, is always connected.

Over my 35 year stink as a water treatment professional I have worked with ozone generators producing up to 20 pounds per day. This Tesla ozone generator will probably produce a few grams a day. There is no need for intense activity, high capacitor discharges, etc. All you need is the right primary to secondary ratio, the right arc distance, the right air flow of hopefully dry air and a convenient way of running. The genius in this is how he did it over 100 years ago and how he is using an already running fan motor to excite the ozone production end and in my view, the ozone end is running for free. This patent flies in the face of Standard EE while guys are trying to explain how it works with Standard EE. It's like force feeding a hummingbird.

wattsup

shylo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 540
Re: ENERGY AMPLIFICATION
« Reply #7898 on: February 21, 2017, 10:15:43 AM »
Wattsup you said, "there is never a period where nothing is connected"
In line 80 of the patent Tesla say's the current that passes through the motor is periodically interrupted.
I don't  think Tesla used commutators that overlapped, is there any proof he did?
artv

Jeg

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1532
Re: ENERGY AMPLIFICATION
« Reply #7899 on: February 21, 2017, 01:04:17 PM »
Hi guys, Erfinder ;)

I'd like to ask, if the phase difference between current and voltage inside the "in series" circuit is one of the key points. It is something that hasn't been discussed yet and can make a whole lot of difference in predicting circuit's behavior.

Regards

endlessoceans

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 137
Re: ENERGY AMPLIFICATION
« Reply #7900 on: February 21, 2017, 01:22:36 PM »
Hi guys, Erfinder ;)

I'd like to ask, if the phase difference between current and voltage inside the "in series" circuit is one of the key points. It is something that hasn't been discussed yet and can make a whole lot of difference in predicting circuit's behavior.

Regards

Getting warmer

sm0ky2

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3948
Re: ENERGY AMPLIFICATION
« Reply #7901 on: February 21, 2017, 03:52:44 PM »
Hi guys, Erfinder ;)

I'd like to ask, if the phase difference between current and voltage inside the "in series" circuit is one of the key points. It is something that hasn't been discussed yet and can make a whole lot of difference in predicting circuit's behavior.

Regards


I would say that if your tools operate by taking an average, sampled over time
This form of analysis becomes essential, to understand what is happening
Otherwise it is utterly redundant reverse engineering


Instead of an ionizer, we could use this to operate a low inductance motor
Powered by the energy normally wasted in the primary motor.
The "free energy" is the energy we throw away to avoid direct combat with Lenze.
If we didn't throw it away, the motor wouldn't turn, it would just be a heater with a
stationary rotor inside.
Tesla is showing us one (of many) methods to use this energy instead of throwing it away.


I'm not going to go back and forth arguing over what Tesla teaches us, and other people's
Imaginary concepts of magical events.
It's not that complicated


The technologies we have today do the same thing more efficiently, if you get lost on
the mundane details of a non conventional mechanism that's been obsolete for 8 decades
You are missing the context of the operations taking place by said mechanism.


The motor isn't there to provide the energy. It's there to provide an air flow and actuate the
rotary (commutator/or spark gap - it's irrelevant except for convenience).
The motor is the main inductive load, and from a perspective outside the circuit, is
consuming all of the energy. (Whether we use it or not)
The ionizer is operated with only a fraction of this, and the air flow can be achieved using
the ionic potential already present on the plates, therefore requires no fan.


Timer circuit or suitable transformer can run the Ion machine using a fraction of Teslas motor
set-up. And these units are commercially available today. The Ion machine is not important,
what Tesla is really showing us is that the motor doubles as an a/c signal generator.


There's nothing special going on here that Tesla did not demonstrate in his first oscillator.
That's what we should be paying attention to, His secrets are in how he uses the oscillations,
Not his tricks for creating them in a time when we didn't have the tech.
We have the tech now.
Just use a signal generator, a 5555 timer, a radio, a [insert circuit here]
Take the drawings and draw a big red circle around the primary and the capacitor
Take a black sharpie and destroy the rest of the image
Now focus on what is inside those two red circles.
What are they?
Why are they what they are?
How do they relate to each other?


What the f?  <---------------------


Build it
And all will become clear


partzman

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 379
Re: ENERGY AMPLIFICATION
« Reply #7902 on: February 21, 2017, 10:15:49 PM »

Phase relation is important, and not just in the "series" circuit.  Food for thought....  Reactive power is useless up until that moment when you realize it isn't.


Regards

I hate to be redundant but below is the sim from post #7952 only with some additions.  I have shown the reactive power levels in the series and parallel circuit producing the ozone.  They both  have negative power levels therefore their phase angles are slightly >90 degrees.  The motor powering the fan does not loose speed as it field maintains constant current so the ozone (or ideally any load) is produced for free IMO.  Energy amplification.

pm

luc2010

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 113
Re: ENERGY AMPLIFICATION
« Reply #7903 on: February 21, 2017, 11:47:26 PM »
Hello,

tesla us patent 568 176:

i think its:
3 coils wound on toroid! + interrupter(to discharge the 2 caps)+ 2 caps in series + 1 tesla coil?

about the 3 coils? have one more question?

if we connect the primary coil in parallel with the secondery coil of tesla coils? what will happen?

not sure, but maybe we know the true LC circuit!!

Thanks and Regards
luc2010

shylo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 540
Re: ENERGY AMPLIFICATION
« Reply #7904 on: February 22, 2017, 01:05:37 AM »
I think Tesla figured out how to use the flow through circuits , to initiate flow in secondary circuits.
Never getting enough to be the primary , but enough to run secondaries, but you can add more secondaries
That in the end add up to more than the primary can produce.
If you bounce the magnetic field against a field that is of the right polarity at the right time,it can assist
instead of working against you.
It's like taking a little from each sub-circuit to add up to be more than the initial circuit is providing.
I may be wrong , but that is where I'm looking.
artv