I posted info below at energeticforum in DS thread, but might as well create a new thread here. If anyone can do replications, simulations or make this a self runner then I hope you would tell about it in this thread.
I played with two 1:1 trafos a bit and I was able to connect them so that I can get more power out than it consumes. I used small laminated iron trafos whose output was rated at 20 watts. I get maybe about 30-35 watts out, primary uses less than 6 watts. Exact COP is not important as this is low power, but how to get this result should be usefull information. If you have two 1:1 trafos you can easily verify this.
...
So here you have it.
This should be a resonant trafo, I haven't tested this so it is merely a suggestion. I would try it if I had equipment.
I have only tested with pure sine wave, as that is what comes from the mains. No idea what happens with other waveforms.
Hey Jack
Are you sure of the circuit connections in the drawing? I ran it on Falstad sim. The way you have it, Im getting little output as the load is across the transformer winding and the winding doesnt seem to want to give up anything to the resistor/load.
I tried switching the connections of one of the windings on the second transformer. and now there is output, but is is somewhat under the input.
Maybe Im missing something. Im interested though. ;]
Mags
Seems that simulation and real world do not match..
Is this is what really happens, I don't actually care since it works.
T-1000 or anyone with knowledge on this - a question on using a Variac for trying this. I've got a heavy duty Variac and wonder if that would be like a 1:1 isolation transformer when it is adjusted all the way to full voltage? In other words 120VAC in and 120VAC out. I think I also have a second isolation tranformer out of an old power supply.
T-1000 or anyone with knowledge on this - a question on using a Variac for trying this. I've got a heavy duty Variac and wonder if that would be like a 1:1 isolation transformer when it is adjusted all the way to full voltage? In other words 120VAC in and 120VAC out. I think I also have a second isolation tranformer out of an old power supply.
the problem is, i am afraid, that it does not.
Here is my master plan. Anyone who does the above and makes a working prototype should get the second gold medal from Doc, I get the first one as one memento is quite enough. Your device need to give out more than 35 Watts, because that is what I am getting now. Now you will have your name on it and with help of Mr. Jones we go after bigger prizes. This OU prize here first, developer gets 80 % so he can develop it further: bigger, better, badder, well you get the idea. I might take 20 % to cover my own blown up meters and stuff I have spent for this. For bigger prizes I want equal share, just in case I happen to lose my nice job mysteriously. No greed, just that I got 7 mouths to feed. If someone then improves the prototype significantly then we make 40-40-20 split. This 20 percent will then be splitted again later in case someone makes another significant improvement and so on. Then we let anyone do the manufacturing, without anything coming to us unless they want to give. I need no hassles.
Then we let anyone do the manufacturing, without anything coming to us unless they want to give...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autotransformer would not fit. It has single winding while it needs to be 2 coils on same core. The setup seems is quite simple from first look: TR1 gives power source and TR2 is connected as resistive load to TR1. But because of oscillation in TR2, it gives induction in its secondary and that increases impedance for TR1 while TR2 is under load...
You did not find anything wrong in my stoneaged testing method ?
If not then this is the way I see things now:
The World championship soccer game is 0-0, we are at the last minute of extra time on second period. This is the game-of-games, bigger than seventh game of Stanley Cup final, bigger than Super Bowl final, the biggest game there can ever be. The final game. You, barotolougos the goal keeper, prepares to block a penalty shot. All full of adrenaline and ready to block, your teammates are counting on you 'He can do it, we trained him extraordinaly well'. Trevor Buster, nick named 'TrollBuster' prepares to shoot. He knows that after this the game is over, there is no time left. Game-of-the-games will be finished after this, no matter what is the result. There is no pressure on his face, he is calm as the ocean, he has never felt as confident as now. What a wonderfull feeling that is. He steps just one step back from the ball as this is all he needs. He kicks the ball gently, as if it was a golf ball on the green right next to hole. Crowd goes mad, is this guy insane ! Loud moaning fills the stadium as 100 thousand people moan together. 500 million people moans together at their TV sets. We cannot win !!!! Ball starts to move, it rolls and rolls on.
It seems to take forever, you can almost taste the suspense. Ball reaches the goal and stops just after the goal line. Why isn't barotolougos the goalkeeper doing anything ? Oh lord he is just waving hands, seems he cannot reach the ball. Referee comes to check if it was a goal. He walks over slowly, looks on top the ball as that is the only way to see it exactly. Trevor is as calm as before, no sign of panic or fear in his face. Barotolougos the goalkeeper is swearing and spitting, why there is blood coming out of his face ? 'NO GOAL, NO GOAL' he screams in high pitch horrofied voice. Referee kneels down to get closer, suspense in unbelievable, Trevor turns around and begins to move towards center, slowly, calmly...
Referee stands up, blows in the whissle and points at the center. GOAAAAL! TrollBuster scored, crowd explodes, people at their homes in front of their TV sets begin to cry. To win the game-of-games all that was need was just one calm brilliant move, they have finally won the game after hundred years of waiting !
After game it was time for analysis, what in the world happened ! How barotolougos the goalkeeper could not catch that ball ! Slow motion shows that as the ball comes in he moves, so he must have seen it coming. But wait ! Why barotolougos the goalkeeper is behind the net ? You cannot catch the ball behind the goal, you only get mixed up with the net and hurt yourself. That explains why barotolougos the goalkeeper was bleeding. Now who ordered him there ? Pointing fingers turn to coach at the bench but he is not there anymore. He has left the stadium in a hurry and gone exile at north pole. He will never coach any team ever again. He is now history, forever.
This is as much I have to say for any offending posts that are not based on facts, you must be more clever. I hope you have as much fun as I had writing this, but wont respond again to negative opinions. Negative facts are a different story, they move things forward.
I will start my summer vacation after tomorrow, three weeks and no access to net. Meanwhile, the ball is now rolling and coming closer to goal...
You did not find anything wrong in my stoneaged testing method ?
Looks very interesting...
I would like to replicate this, though i don't think i have any 1:1 transformers. Can anyone show me how to connect the two transformers to create a step-up - step-down transformers with a spark gap?
Also, do both 1:1 transformers need the same number of windings to achieve resonance, if not can you calculate the capacitance over T2 to achieve it?
Beware, if you dont know how trafos are winded you have 50 % chance to guess correct when you connect lower coil in second trafo. If you put it wrong way you will consume all power in your first trafo. Use a light bulb as current limiter at first trafo.
Or you can skip the first trafo and use enough caps instead, check the other picture I posted. In this case the first trafo will be in the grid somewhere.
Could this project be run using a pair of toroids instead of the regualr trandformers?
Paul-R
John go borrow a meter from someone you know and then come back with the numbers
and if they are good I'll get excited and start building too.
I already wasted too much time on somebody else's good idea that did not work.
I have other things on my plate to do now.
Norman
Still looking through my junk piles for some 1:1 isolation transformers. It just occurred to me that some of the old computer UPS units probably have 1:1 transformers in them as they pass through 120 AC when not running off the battery. Getting ready to pull a couple apart to check it out. As I've gotten some cheap at garage sales this might be a good source for higher power 1:1 transformers since they seem to be quite expensive from sources I've seen so far. I'm not sure on this but will post later what I find.
Old Tripp Lite had 3 transformers but no luck with 1:1's. Still a few more to check out. Now I'm thinking old high end audio equipment may have some. got some of those laying around too.
barotolougos already duplicated, though not highest efficiency because of high idle current. With a bit of math and finding correct parallel cap he will get it right and happy days for us all.
Trust me, this is the real deal. Or I am blind and cannot feel heat difference of two similar light bulbs correctly. One burns my hand while other is cold. You don't have to attempt to duplicate if you dont want to, lets enjoy the summer time.
In other words current is not indicating of incoming power even in same resistances (bulbs) since different voltages are in play. If you cannot understand that, i cannot say anything more.
E2,
All switch mode power supplies such as used in computers has a 1:1 Ferrite transformer at the AC input line.
The transformers are small but could be used at lower wattage for testing purpose.
GL.
Well, earlier today I ordered two isolation trafos that I found on-line -- on the right in attached. $11.66 each, from Allied Electronics.
The one on the left, toroidal, is also an isolation trafo and almost did that, but cost $18.11 each... maybe next time, but soon I'll have the two little guys (1.7lbs each actually).
I was surprised I could get these at such a low price.
Thanks again, Jack! lots of fun and adventure thrown in...
Hi Groundloop, Thanks for the suggestion. I had thought about that but based on what Jack was saying that they need a lot of winds and fairly high resistance or impedance on the input I didn't think the ones I've seen would work as they mostly appear to have a small amount of winds which I assume will be fairly low resistance or impedance. I may be wrong on that and may check it out anyway as I've got dozens of those kind of power supplies laying around.
What is your take on Jack's concept here?
jack... i duplicated the effect and saw that this circuit resembles a current multiplier scheme as a parallel LC tank circuit is. In energy terms i did not find anything extraordinary.
And YES, i urged all experimenters especially to care about different bulbs brightness. This is quite deceptive.
for example.
i took my variac and one 75w 220volt bulb in order to flow some 0.1 amps in order the lamp to light faintly. This happens at 40 volts more or less, thus outputing the bulb some 4w. But if you pass this in your device and the 0.1 amps are of 220v tension is some 22watts (almost double). Assuming a P.F. of 1 then the second bulb will light far far more. :)
...
Good find there Professor. While fairly low wattage it's a decent price to check this out. I'm actually astounded at how much they want for isolation transformers these days. It's crazy. I know copper is expensive but some of these places must think they are using gold. Allied Electronics is a company that's been around forever - I was buying parts from them 50 years ago (maybe even 51 :) ).
I already have 2 small 1:1 trafos.
I would be delighted to consult any -as precise as possible- measurements protocol.
Did you actually MEASURE the current ("some 0.1 amps")?
Did you actually MEASURE the input and the output POWER? If so, what were the results (numbers)?
Would you provide a photo of your set-up?
A suggestion concerning getting a 1:1 ratio Transformer.
Just get 2 rolls of wire the same awg. and wind a bifilar coil.
Wind as many windings as you need to get the right impedance.
@allThanks for presenting these results, wattsup, and for the photo!
Could not wait till tonight so I tried the two Hammond toroidals.
Input: 121.2 VAC at 0.24 amps
Output: 57.6 VAC at 0.50 amps
No capacitor used.
Sorry for messy photo.
Connected as per @JN's first photo, post #1.
Got to go to work now.
wattsup
Watts Up, Please try a Diode as shown in the schematic.
That should give O/U. Also, try various size Caps in different places.
Thanks for sharing your set up.
The isolation trafos that I ordered arrived, see photo and schematic below.
I did some initial measurements with one trafo using a 40W incandescent bulb as a load. I put the bulb in my light box so I could also keep track of light output in lux.
Results this evening, sorry the vid is hurried and imperfect:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1Y4J4VQ2JI&feature=youtu.be (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1Y4J4VQ2JI&feature=youtu.be)
Hi baroutologos,
... Regarding your measurements on transformers, it is indeed strange and I also found big differences in measured no load input current and the calculated input current which came from measured transformer parameters.
The problem may come partly from the digital LC meter: it does not use 50 or 60 Hz test frequency for L measurements, my own LC meter (Maxwell DMM MX-25 304 old type) uses about 200 Hz in the some hundred milliHenry and Henry ranges and it is doubtful how the different mains transformer cores perform at such a "high" frequency, most cores may lose permeability to some percent but some other cores may lose even half of their '50 Hz' permeability. This means that a 50 Hz test circuit should be used for measuring the transformer coils. I repeat this frequency difference does not fully explain the situation...
TheCell:
Thank you for correcting me, you can multiply Vrms x Irms to get a proper power measurement.
...
MileHigh
Magluvin.
That's just a bullshit posting by you were you are strutting around puffing your chest out and stroking your ego because you saw me make a mistake. If I corrected every single error you made and made a big stink about it and gave a speech you would not like it one bit. The LED example is more bullshit because if someone else made the same mistake you would have politely corrected them and them left it at that. With me you ran around like a crazy person screaming your lungs off.
Don't start this nonsense again where you are going to "go after me." What you do know is that I know my stuff and I am not perfect. Big farking deal.
In my previous posting I was trying to help Wattsup and I made a mistake. Do NOT make the conscious decision that you are are going to try to make my life miserable every time I make a mistake.
MileHigh
CHET!!
Wilby has been busy. ;) What you been up to?
Mags
Tito
Thats "OUR FATHER"
You putz!! [sorry I didn't mean that.......]
Mags I'll give you a shout.
Thx
Chet
@all
Well here is my last trials using a secondary configuration as well. Mind again that these transformers are step down and hence not a true isolation transformer.
...
Enjoy.
wattsup
If you want me to dig it up in reference to the LED, it clearly shows that you were "adjusting" the led bias voltage(of a red led) to suit you argument.
Let me ask you M. In your post, did you mean that P "can" be calculated by VxI? Or even Prms= Vrms x Irms? Is that what you meant to say? If so, then it doesnt suit your argument, does it. What were you thinking at the time? Hmm? What?
MileHigh (http://www.overunity.com/profile/milehigh.20740/) and Magluvin (http://www.overunity.com/profile/magluvin.20048/)
Wouldn't it be much better just to find two 1:1 transformers and see results yourself instead?
Seriously, this time it is not complex circuit and you already know how to achieve resonance...
Wattsup:
For your DC current measurement you are at nearly the rock-bottom output from the digital clamp meter. Hence your accuracy is very poor. I would suggest that you just use a regular digital multimeter or an analog ammeter with the proper maximum scale to get a better DC power calculation.
MileHigh
And also @MH's post;
So I put the DC output through a multimeter as amps and to my greatest dismay, I saw only 45.5mA. I also took off the Variac and went direct to mains via the Watt Counter.
It's refreshing to see someone take suggestions and quickly proceed with actual testing -- thanks, Wattsup.
Your vid is still processing as I write, but I look forward to viewing it. Glad you went ahead and got the Kill-A-Watt meter also; it may prove useful as we go forward.
I told you so.
Why you wasting my time posting these faulty results.
Taking measurments the correct way is critical otherwise you don't have to do this kind of research and especially don't post results unless you are clear that they are accurate.
This time you changed setup and variac seems is needed component for effect in your case. It acts as first tuned transformer...
Just leave power meter before variac and everyone will be happy :)
Well i don't know what to say.
I did not disable a reply button or anything else so if you are not able to send out a Private Message i wonder who's the idiot.
This makes me think you don't know something about anything.
That must be the reason why you ask idiot questions am i right?
Also, i share too i build and tested the experiment in this topic yesterday, you can see the results on page 6.
kNOWING ISN'T THE SAME AS TESTING, SO SHARING WHAT YOU KNOW IS NOTHING COMPARED TO SHARING YOUR TEST RESULTS.
This means your still in on the game since test results have got nothing to do with you asking idiot questions.
Baroutologos:
I didn't want to say anything because I end up being labelled the "bad" guy but finally you said something and I will take this opportunity to expand on what you said.
To the people in this thread, go back and look at the very first posting made by Jack. Take a serious critical look at it. What do you see?
It's more like what you don't see. There are no critical measurements made at all. It's all just subjective anecdotal stuff like "This light bulb is dim and the other light bulb is brighter." That means almost nothing if you don't know anything about the actual voltages and currents and possible phase relationships for the input and the output. There is nothing like that in the first posting and it's also very obvious that Jack is a beginner.
If you want to take my advice you should all go back and seriously debate Jack's first posting and the points he makes and decide if what he says has any merit.
Beyond that there are other issues but they don't even need to be discussed. The first and foremost issue is the first posting in this thread. Is it legit or not? I am not implying any deception being made by Jack at all. It's all about the proposition and the measurements (or lack of measurements) and the logic that is being proposed in the first posting.
In a way, this is a microcosm of the original RomeroUK building frenzy. There were big unanswered questions (Can you show us the output of the FWBR bus?) and as a result people went crazy on a building frenzy with incomplete data. Just a few simple questions would have busted Romero and would have prevented a whole year's worth of useless experimenting.
MileHigh
For those of you still exploring this, do me a favor and try this: Feed the circuit with 120 vac but through a common wall mount dimmer. The dimmer chops the AC sine wave into a saw tooth.
I uploaded to youtube the following video....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H7hfbVE4Hfo (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H7hfbVE4Hfo)
The watt meter most likely shows measurement error. In best case you could find 100W+ 1 Ohm resistor and attach to "cold" wire from mains in series then put oscilloscope on resistor and see RMS amps.
You are mixing reactive power coming back from transformers with conventional power so funny things happen. :)
@T-1000Looking forward to seeing your connection diagram. I'll try it.
Well, the problem is with this set-up that the output transformer E-F-G-H was starting to give some slight smoke so I stopped the video. I will start again tonight and make a clear connection diagram and do some tests at lower voltage off the Variac. ...
What is incredible is that I am getting more voltage output then the applied input voltage while still being at the 120 volts connection mode so there is something happening with this method. If this was making a simple short circuit, that would explain the input amps/voltage/watts, but 2000 watts seems so high for such a reading, and then try to explain the increased output voltage.
Something is funny and it is not Red Skelton (although he is very funny).
wattsup
Steve,
Unless I am mistaken, it appears from your photo that the clamp meter has BOTH conductors of the line cord going through it. You must have only ONE conductor going through.
I suggest you move the meter over to where the wiring breaks out to the transformer leads, then you can clamp around ONE of the leads.
I also looked at the power fact P.F. -- for the input, it shows as approx. 0.6 -- and it varies, 0.5 to about 0.7. (The input power comes from a dimmer, which is connected to the mains.)Ah, yeah. That's a definite no-no if you expect to be able to measure accurately with the meters you are using. Not even the clamp meters will measure accurately with a chopped up sine wave.
Could this be why the P3 meter is having difficulty getting the AC amps (and the power)?Definitely!
How does one measure the current accurately -- or better, the power -- when the PF is not 1.0?Buy a variac!
@T-1000
Well, the problem is with this set-up that the output transformer E-F-G-H was starting to give some slight smoke so I stopped the video. I will start again tonight and make a clear connection diagram and do some tests at lower voltage off the Variac. But again, my diagram is good for my transformers and may not apply to others.
--------------------
I played with:
1) A 1 to 1 small trafo (measured Henries: about 0.350 H primary and secondary).
2) A signal generator (see picture) (and also an home made 555 + Mosfeet square wave gen).
3) And old hammeg HM207 scope.
I have noticed that, with *square* waves:
These square waves "morph" into nice sine waves when you approach the resonant freq of the
trafo (about 170 KHz in my case). A trafo as also some (small) capacitance. No?
When I reach this very freq the 'peak to peak' voltage is multiplied by more than ten.
Beware: no load here! No 'OU' claimed.
Anyway, I did not know that you can transform square waves into (more apparent 'voltageable')
sinus waves with a mere 1:1 trafo should you reach the right freq. Did you?
Of course, with a sine wave you can also observe a voltage multiplication at resonance.
Very Best from Brest,
Yann
'Why not using at least DC input? With a DC bat and an inverter, for ex."
Hi very witty, clever and active OU guys!
I would like to thank some people here.
It sounds like that:
- We do not need wires (at least one wire is sufficient!) = we do not need
(official) electrons/current to charge up a capacitor and to light some 'lamps'.
Thanks to Lynx. See: Joule Lamp.
- We do not need (official) electrons/current to perform electrolysis save this
(fictitious?) "displacement current". Thanks to Chistopher Robert Eccles.
See attached (one) Eccles patent. "Fracture cell apparatus" - GB 2.324.307A R.Eccles.pdf
Thanks also to "Frederic David Tombe" about "displacement current":
http://www.gsjournal.net/old/science/tombe47.pdf (http://www.gsjournal.net/old/science/tombe47.pdf)
http://www.gsjournal.net/old/science/tombe48.pdf (http://www.gsjournal.net/old/science/tombe48.pdf)
- We can use pure reactice power.
Tanks to Kator01 for referencing an informative vid.
Topic appart:
- Homeopathy does not need molecules. Thanks to (Late) Jacques Benveniste.
So, all what is called kinda 'fictitious' by Mainstream Science seems to actually be "solid". Seems it not?
Very Best from Brest,
Yann
PS: please, just an off topic question to "Nikola Tesla" Backward spelled:
Did your self running magnetic motor were faked? Or what?
OK, Tinsel... and so on.However, my French is execrable, much worse than your English. But you knew that already, didn't you.
Obviously, you really did your homework.
Obviously, you are very knowledgeable.
Obviously, you are a very good experimenter.
Obviously, you are a very clever individual.
Obviously your English is far better than mine (of coarse)...
Obviously, (IMO, :) )) your EGO is as huge as the Fujiyama.
I have a great respect for you but I do not like you.
I also do not fear you (at all) BTW.
Obviously, you have not answered my simple question:
Was your very running on magnets only motor a fake?
Obviously, Backwarding 'things/names/etc... is a Satanic way.
What is your (hidden) agenda?
Le bonjour vous va, cher Monsieur,
Jean-Yves
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrDMT6lSeEo (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrDMT6lSeEo)
here I demonstrate ZERO wires power transfer, NOT broadcast, at high efficiencies, using AIR CORE resonant coupling, extracting LARGE AMOUNTS of real power from the reactive power in the power supply to perform useful work, apparently violating inverse-square falloff with distance and providing a "hook" or path by which other energies might enter the system from elsewhere...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MIC47PN1-ys (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MIC47PN1-ys)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MK90_CbnAeY (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MK90_CbnAeY)
TinselKoala (clever name, as Jean pointed out) wrote on p. 10:It was not my intention to "hijack" this interesting thread. However, it does seem that my work lately has been relevant to this thread's topic and that of one or two others.
Intriguing vids, would like to understand better. In your "supernova mode", the bulbs are very bright but the input power is also high. I see that and the frequency shift for this SN mode - but what is going on here? some sort of resonance-coupling, or what? Pls explain.
The titles with these vids includes the term "electric OU"... Are you claiming OU? (I think not; but would appreciate the clarification of the term "electric OU". Indeed-are you measuring output power, quantitatively, or could you?)Indeed I can measure output power quantitatively, but it requires some definition. Would you like to know the reactive power circulating in the transmitting loop? It is quite large, involving an oscillation at between 500 kHz and 1 MHz of 40-60 v p-p and high peak currents. This is "recycled" accumulated or stored power though, like the spin of a flywheel. The transmitting loop, which is at minimum 2 or 3 strands of solid #12 house wiring, gets perceptibly warm during prolonged operation.
PS -- I like your term "photocalorimeter" -- this is what I've been practicing with my calibrated light-box.
@TKSo do I. I don't want to hijack this thread, so further discussion of my devices can happen in the comments to the specific videos where I show the interesting effects as I find them. I'll try to answer these questions here though.
Don't fret about name calling members.
Even thought this is not @JN relevant, your videos with Tx and Rx effects is just great.
I have questions about your set-up.
The ammeter is in series with the input power coming from the battery/power supply. Lately to stabilize things I've been running on the 12 volt, 5 A-H battery in parallel with the brute force DC PS with the system set to provide a steady 13 volts within the range of 1-5 amps draw. A regulated PS doesn't work so well since the current draw is so variable. I have the two DMMs patched in so that the ammeter is in series just before clipping to the board's power input leads, and the voltmeter is across the battery terminals. There is about 8 inches of twisted pair connecting the battery/PS to the board's input power leads. Scoping the input power shows a pretty steady DC voltage without much disturbance, and the voltage sags with heavy draw.
1) On the Tx side, since your voltage reading does not change (fixed voltage applied) and only your amp readings is increasing in certain conditions. So where is the amps read in series?
2) If the voltage reading is parallel to the Tx circuit feed and the amps is in series with the same location, I would like to know if in your Tx circuit after the feed, is there any full bridge rectifier that is isolating any possible return from your Tx coil back towards the feed side that may be the cause of the increase in amperage reading.
Meaning, is it possible, if this is DC pulsed Tx, that the receiver receives this DC pulsed Tx, hence a signal that goes on and off is exchanged, but when the Tx is on, the Rx is off, and when the Tx is off, the Rx is on. If this is the case then this may explain your Nova mode where when the Tx if off, the Rx is transmitting to the Tx, and when the Tx is on, the Tx is transmitting to the Rx so in essence is it possible that both Tx and Rx are both Tx-ing and RX-ing to each other in a loop that produces the Nova mode.In one of the vids I show the receiver and the transmitter scoped at the same time. Both signals are nice sinusoids. Frequency and phase do change when SNM happens. The relative phase depends on where you clip the leads to the rx-- or equivalently, which side of the rx loop is facing the tx. If I hold the Rx by the probe leads and rotate the loop 180 degrees, the phase goes with it. So the relative phases depend on the loop orientation, i.e. which "end" of the loop you choose as a reference.
3) In your video, while you were playing with the third loop on the left of the Tx or between the Tx and the Rx and this increased the Rx fan speed, I could not help but realize you were showing, in a way, @otto's ECD function were all that is missing in yours is a mobius loop were half is Tx and half is Rx that feed each other to increase output. (Maybe a bad flash in the brain but when you were adjusting the third loop distances, @otto's ECD just jumped out at me given his loops had about the same distances.I am impressed by how LITTLE the meters are influenced by radiations etc. from the device. Its output is a remarkably clean sinusoid at between 500 kHz and about 850 kHz so there is actually very little sidebanding or rf "noise". I see solid voltage and current readings that are predictable, repeatable, and clearly related to receiver position, bulb brightness, etc. In other words, I am believing the meters in this case. This device doesn't disturb the meter performance, and the input side is straight ordinary DC, not even pulsed.
When @otto was doing his ECD experiments, he had reported that under certain conditions his power supply voltage and amperage readings were just going haywire. I have seen this happen many times myself but we know this is not indicative of a dramatic increase in power consumption but rather the voltage and amperage readings were showing a high return of flyback from the pulsed device.
I guess the base question is...
4) How does the Tx side realize it needs more power as seen by the increase in the amperage readings you are showing under certain conditions? That is a big one to ask.
wattsup
PS: @JouleSeeker
Just saw your post that is in the same line as mine.
@TKThe problem with "here" is that inevitably my own personal troll/stalker will show up and start bombing the thread, and that's not fair to anyone. At least on my YT account he's blocked whenever he shows up under a new username.
Thanks for your reply. This is very interesting stuff and getting to know this better is a key to many effects that I have a base logical explanation but do not want to expand on it now since without better knowledge, it may sound like I just walked off a flying saucer with new twin antennae sticking out of my forehead. lol
About discussing this here, it does not really matter since my experimenting with @JNs idea is now put on hold until he gets back from vacations. I see no point is continuing since of course we can make endless changes and variation of his base idea, but this would no longer be pertinent to his fixed recommendation.
One ultimate test with your set-up for me would be to fix the Tx and Rx loops so they cannot move apart from your best found distance and angle. Then this will enable you to lift the complete set-up off the table and turn the complete system in various angles relative to the ground plane to see if there is any change in Tx/Rx strength. This will show if ambient energy orientations can affect the complete system if both Tx and Rx loops do not change their mutual orientations. There is a reason for this madness but it would be so hard to explain in a few lines.
wattsup
I can't help thinking about the simularities of your experiment with olne of Don Smith's (one Tx coil - multiple tunes Rx coils).
You mentioned 'above 500kHz' so you wevelength is about 600 meters. Don Smih was using about 36 kHz - that's about 8.3 km.
It would be interesting to check if there is a reletionship between the operting frequency and the distance where the effect is at peak.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sjCc16Mf4lITha's not it. In your video the guy shows the effect of tuned LC circuits vs untuned. I would be interested to see the frequency-distance relationship (tuned or untuned). In other words, I am interested to see if there is a standing wave effect in the original TKs videos.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=SpadJ03stqU# (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=SpadJ03stqU#)!
The presenter is at first showing a hybrid capacitative-inductive system involving high voltages. It's pretty neat, but I don't think you can pick up that transmitter by hand while it's operating. Later he shows a system like mine, but I can't tell if he's getting that "sn" effect.
There is a big LENR conference in Korea next month, still with "CF" in the title, ICCF17. Interesting stuff... Are the two communities actually reading the same book, while speaking different languages and not communicating much at all?
Avalon.I agree. I also suspect that a properly constructed waveguide might increase the effect significantly.
Using TK's unit, I would suspect that standing (or at least colliding) waves may be had
with 2 TX loops connected in series placed apart, with the RX loop in between.
@Jack -- Glad to see you back! just saw your latest posts. It's late here now... let me read your posts more thoroughly and get back to you, tomorrow.
- Steve
Resistance of coil I used in iron trafo (5000 permeability) was 165 ohms, very thin wire, 0.0x mm. ...Yeah, that's really thin. I would say, that's no wire at all. I know, that's not a mistake; it's within this range, but anyway, somewhat more specific...
Resistance of coil I used in iron trafo (5000 permeability) was 165 ohms, very thin wire, 0.0x mm. ...
Resistance of 280 meter Litz nanoperm (80000 permeability) is about 45 ohms.
Steve, I see your trafos are about the same size as mine, what is the resistance of your coils and permeability of the core ? Did you try reversing the coil that is parallel with load in the second trafo ? You should see major difference. What about idle currents without load ? If it can light up bulb (in series with those two coils in second trafo) without load then it will not work too well. I suspect that this is the problem now, impedance is too low and input power bypasses load and goes via coils. This will certainly ruin the OU effect.
....
I measured the resistances as follows:
Primary: 21.3 ohms
Secondary: 35.9 ohms, which is a bit surprising since these are 1:1 transformers, but evidently a smaller-gauge wire is used on the secondary.
I have an inductance meter, but it only goes up to 20 Henry -- and both the primary and the secondary exceed this value. I doubt the cores have high permeability; but have found no data on this.
....
You took apart a precision Simpson current transformer just for the cores?
This makes my heart hurt.
http://www.surplussales.com/inductors/FerToro/FerToro-3.html
http://www.surplussales.com/Inductors/Inductors.html
There is EVM board available,Output is 24 volts, 2 amps DC, with a small ripple. The 600 kHz is the internal switching frequency.
http://www.ti.com/lit/ug/sluu308/sluu308.pdf (http://www.ti.com/lit/ug/sluu308/sluu308.pdf)
costs 49 dollars, output 2 amps 24 volts at 600 kHz, well in nanoperm range. Makes one think...
I read the specs and you can take the square wave as output via one pin, if I understood the spec correctly. Of course if it is only DC then it is of no use. I have a hardware guy who can double check this for me if I want to try this out. First I would need some other gear which I can possibly get for free for limited time. If I can put 600 kHz via nanoperm, then I will consider this EVM if hardware guy says there is square wave output. I also need to check first how the square wave behaves when it goes via nanoperm core. If I would see clean sine wave at output then there is chance EVM could work here. Plot thickens as new twists occur... I will keep you posted of my progess, if any.I think the pin output is just the oscillator output not a power output.
T-1000, I think you have access to decent signal generator and some ferrite. Any chance you could spend few hours and give this a try using higher frequency ? I feel like a bee doing dancing moves in front of the nest. The best dancer gets the attention of other bees, damn do I have to learn the Jackson moves or what ?
Hey what about using two of these buggers.
http://www.metglas.com/products/xfmr.htm (http://www.metglas.com/products/xfmr.htm)
hehe
wattsup
Produced by Korea’s Cheryong using Metglas-Based Wound Cores Manufactured by Woojin32 tonnes (Approx)3.7 m x 3.95 m x 3. 5 m (W x D x H); IEC 60076Efficiency 99.31 %
Your results are quite strange.
Inductances in parallel are "supposed" to follow the same rule as resistors in parallel: 1/Ltotal = 1/L1 + 1/L2 + ... + 1/Ln
And in series, they simply add. Have you tested your coils in series to see if that result is "strange" as well? And what happens if you reverse the connections of one of the parallel coils?
I have also noted the fallacy of the LC meters concerning those iron core transformers. Mine gives a 1/10 measurment in comparison to real impedance that comes at 50 hz.
and yes.. parallel inductances are like resistors. but not wound on same core (closed magnetic circuit) of course. .e. equal inductances in parallel config wound on same core have equal inducactance as each one. (try checking it with a bifillar coil)
That last part is interesting, thanks. It makes sense too, like simply using a thicker wire for a single winding on the core.
What about series connection for coils on the same core.... add inductances like normal?
Parameters you asked:
iron trafo: very thin wire, 0.0x mm thick, resistance was 165 ohms. Coil was small, atmost 10 mm wide. If you break trafo made by chinese company named Jutai then you will get the same coil I used. Trafo was rated to 20 watts and it was used to light up 80 small bulbs, not leds.
Hello, I read the forum a long time, now would like to contribute to research.Thanks for joining in. I think the difference - at least in Jack's initial circuit is that he has 2 separate cores whereas the autotransformer you show has just one core. Your idea of using 2 MOT's sounds interesting. I'm visualizing an easy way of just joining the cores mechanically (and electrically) but using only the only the HV windings on each thus giving a 1:1 if they are the same type. Not sure if that would work but it came to mind. I've got a lot of MOT's laying around so I might give that a try.
I was looking at the schematic made ​​by Jack Noskills and I realize that is the same as an autotransformer. So, if there really is OU, this would not be due to the configuration of the coils but the high impedance of the circuit.
Below I show the points of equivalence. What do you think?
I'm thinking about disassemble two microwave transformers and use the two high voltage coils to make a high impedance isolation transformer.
Thanks for joining in. I think the difference - at least in Jack's initial circuit is that he has 2 separate cores whereas the autotransformer you show has just one core. Your idea of using 2 MOT's sounds interesting. I'm visualizing an easy way of just joining the cores mechanically (and electrically) but using only the only the HV windings on each thus giving a 1:1 if they are the same type. Not sure if that would work but it came to mind. I've got a lot of MOT's laying around so I might give that a try.
Jack - have you considered adding an earth GROUND to the circuit? I'm seeing this as a way to allow charge to flow into the circuit. Conservation of charge seems to be strictly required; hope this helps.
@JSThink F-u-s-e ... I know you know what that is :) maybe 2 amp?
I had been thinking the same thing for days now but have not mustered the courage to try it, fearing a major short and system wide burn out. lol
But come to think of it, I think I mentioned this before that when the standard circuit was running and the bulb was lit at its regular load position, I had scoped each side of the load and found that one side was a good four times higher in voltage then the other side of the load. That seems rather unorthodox for an AC output that should be alternating at the same level from both sides. So maybe the side with the lower output can receive the ground negative.
I am just scared of trying it because the mains line has some good amperage there that could shoot up real fast.
wattsup
@JS
I had been thinking the same thing for days now but have not mustered the courage to try it, fearing a major short and system wide burn out. lol
But come to think of it, I think I mentioned this before that when the standard circuit was running and the bulb was lit at its regular load position, I had scoped each side of the load and found that one side was a good four times higher in voltage then the other side of the load. That seems rather unorthodox for an AC output that should be alternating at the same level from both sides. So maybe the side with the lower output can receive the ground negative.
I am just scared of trying it because the mains line has some good amperage there that could shoot up real fast.
wattsup
Nice T-1000, I think I understood why it works.... This can be experimented with later once we get one successfull replication and if this scales up to higher frequencies well.
Here is Romanov self runner in Russian side:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7eKi7ol12c4#t=0h44m0s (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7eKi7ol12c4#t=0h44m0s)
The main working principle is in LC resonance in series generating pure current with lowest voltage in last winding as possible+ attached BEMF from Joule ringer for pure voltage and with much higher frequency sawtooth wave for mixing up with current. When current is mixed with BEMF voltage in 180 degrees to each other, it adds for summed up power. Strangely enough, nobody was giving more attention to this...
Here is my quick drawn circuit and signals waveforms:
OM Gosh does anyone here have time to do a proper schematic translation from this information? T-1000 can you provide us with a parts list as well? We will look forward to an off the self parts project we can ALL make to the same standard world wide.
The main working principle is in LC resonance in series generating pure current with lowest voltage in last winding as possible+ attached BEMF from Joule ringer for pure voltage and with much higher frequency sawtooth wave for mixing up with current. When current is mixed with BEMF voltage in 180 degrees to each other, it adds for summed up power. Strangely enough, nobody was giving more attention to this...
Here is my quick drawn circuit and signals waveforms:
T-1000
Is G1/G2 just a Joule Thief circuit?
How are 2 Joule Thief circuits wired together in your circuit?
Thanks
DonL
wattup, have you scoped what is the output waveform like, can you confirm if it is rectified sine wave ? If so, then at high frequency one could also say it is "DC with has component in it (SM)" or "dirty DC (TK)". Coincidence ?
@JN
I'll look into that tonight.
I do remember that when putting just a scope probe on each side of the load (no probe grounds used), one side sine wave was a good three times higher then the other and slightly off phase, I'd say about 25% off phase. I found that to be interesting but really don't know how to determine if the sine wave is rectified DC or simple AC.
My output volts meter only sees the AC.
wattsup
As requested -
Changed bulb to 40w - as expected, begins to glow at lower voltage (I am using a 240 Variac for testing)
Wattmeter pre variac - 240v 0.07A and 10.2W
Inline digital ampmeter shows (in place of safety bulb) - .06 to .07A AC of course.
Begining to feel Wattsup was on the money. Maybe the coils 170ohms is to high for this exercise.
Let me know what you think. Thanks, Penno.
How does one rectify DC and get a sine wave, anyway? Curious Koalas want to know.I was talking about rectified sine wave, meaning if the negative cycle is folded back to positive at output in the circuit. So output waveform looks like sine wave pulses, when frequency is high enough then it 'looks' like DC in scope if you look at it 'far' enough'.
One result. transformer # 14T0011-002 surplus new. Two multiple tap primaries N - 100v -105v -110v -115v -120v plus multiple secondaries. Idle current will reduce to 21ma. using 1.8 mfd 600v cap. 40w incandescent bulb on load pulls 40.8w on meter. Next test 40w bulb in input side glows brighter than one in load side. This transformer weighs 22 lbs. and was used to try to get a large measurable difference.
Garry
[size=78%]Quote from: iflewmyown on August 15, 2012, 04:08:57 PM[/size]
One result. transformer # 14T0011-002 surplus new. Two multiple tap primaries N - 100v -105v -110v -115v -120v plus multiple secondaries. Idle current will reduce to 21ma. using 1.8 mfd 600v cap. 40w incandescent bulb on load pulls 40.8w on meter. Next test 40w bulb in input side glows brighter than one in load side. This transformer weighs 22 lbs. and was used to try to get a large measurable difference.
Garry
Jack :You need to use two similar coils from it and leave others unconnected.
That is what I did.
Jack: Use the finer coils. Measure the idle power of just one coil, then compare it to power you see when two coils are connected together (without load). Idle power should be lower. If it higher then second coil is wrong way and you need to swap connections.
That is what I did.
Jack: Check the efficiency of your trafo, use it as normal trafo and check how much power it can provide at output.
Each coil separate 124VAC .085A Dc. ohms .8
Wired together .038A no load
Normal isolation transformer With load 124VAC 2.2A input
Normal isolation transformer With load 120VAC 2.2A out
Garry
@ T1000 (ARUNAS): Did you make a video of your setup?, unfortunately for me, I can't get it from your quick drawn circuit.
Thanks
You asked to see my efficiency of my transformer
I replied
Normal isolation transformer With load 124VAC 2.2A input Normal isolation transformer With load 120VAC 2.2A out
It does halve the voltage wired as shown in the diagram.
I did try the two lamp experiment the input bulb is warmer, not the output. The DC ohms are listed above and are equal.
No one wants this to work more than me. I bought these transformers just for this experiment. I did the two transformer experiment with bulbs first. I listed the model number so no one else would waste money on this transformer. It may well work with every other transformer in the known universe but not with these two.
I was trained in this field forty years ago and it should not work like you claim so I didn't test your idea till just now. Every time someone sees something new to them they tell the world but I have only seen free energy three times in thirty years and I declined to pursue each of those ideas ( none were original with me )
I wasted an hour this morning retesting and twenty minutes typing this. ( I type very slowly ).
Garry
P.S. If you have this setup working with iron transformers at 60Hz. A picture with meters would encourage people. Even the two bulb test with an infrared thermometer would be helpful. I have been sucked in before by people with an idea who want someone else to do the work. There is free energy for the taking and it has to be somebodies idea. Once you have seen it you will chase every lead to make it practical.
[snip]
I have one replication now by a qualified EE, low power trafo and coils have about 35 ohms resistance. This gave about COP of 1.5, a mere 7 watts extra but it is a start. Stronger coils would gave better COP. Output waveform is flattened sinusoid, so most likely meters are not quite accurate. ...
.
Every time someone sees something new to them they tell the world but I have only seen free energy three times in thirty years and I declined to pursue each of those ideas ( none were original with me )
There is free energy for the taking and it has to be somebodies idea. Once you have seen it you will chase every lead to make it practical.
I bought 3 identical trafos at ebay 220V, 28V 3 Amp 85 Watts
disassembled all of them unwound one secondary and rewound it with the
primary of another trafo, so I got a 1:1 Trafo . The rewound coil is
the upper one . Could not get it so perfect . THe DC resistance is around 17 Ohms.
Cannot measure the impedance.
Like Jack said, if the polarity of one coil is wrong Lamp1 if full lit and Lamp2 is dark.
Both Lamps are 220 V 25W Lamps (used in refrigerator )
Lamp1 is on the first picture the left on (that one with the lower intensity)
Wattmeter showed 9,1W
Input Volts 234,7V AC 50 Hz
P calc = Input Volts * I(Lamp1) = 8,2145 W
Now I think it's better not to rely on the value of the wattmeter.
Input Watts calculated from the values of the multimeter.(As the other values)
With a phase delay U->I of 9 Degrees measured by my scope.
Sorry no picture .
cos(9) = 0,98
->
8,2145 W * 0.98 = 8,05021 input watts
______________________
U(Lamp1) = 45,5 V
I(Lamp1) = 35 mA
P(Lamp1) = 1,5925 W
______________________
U(Lamp2) = 93,3 V
I(Lamp2) = 59 mA
P(Lamp2) = 5,5047 W
______________________
Sum POut = 7,0972 W
_____________________________________________
COP = 0,88
What further improvements can be made?
I could wind 2 identical coils with a much thinner wire. (Don't have many options)
But the DC resistance will be around 30 to 50 Ohms . I think that is not
acceptable, because of the heat losses...
Greetings BK
[...] And I don't understand why Load:Lamp2 lights up stronger then CurrentLimiter:Lamp1 , because both are of the same wattage in my case.
How I relate this to the circuit in this topic is that we are using frequency of the AC and causing a splitting AND usage of the lines of force (both negative and positive lines of force) by making a path available to each force. We are doubling the potential differences. We up to this point have meters and other test equipment developed to sense the effects of the positive going lines of force. This is why we have not noticed the negative lines of force, nor even knew of their benefit.
We have no doubt all heard of "for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction" many times in our lives. But have we ever stopped and thought of how can we use the opposite reaction as well as the positive action. Newton slipped that one passed the censors and us for a long time. At least it eluded me until this morning.
If we apply this with a little imagination toward "the divisable by three" practice of Tesla. It might mean create two forces: one in any direction the second force in the opposite will naturally occur. The third force will be created (energy) when the first two forces are recombined.
TheCell,
Have you figured out what is going on in your setup ? Would it make any sense to measure current in various positions in the circuit ? Referring to your picture, current before and after limiter bulb, current before and after each coil, current before and after load bulb, then current in the N line.
If you got scope, then check current and voltage waveforms at output and at input. Output waveform might look weird. On input side check current in L and N separately, are they different ?
One option is to use GND instead of N, then measure current coming in from L and current going to GND, also to N so you can compare. Maybe this setup is now pushing back and it confuses meters. I use stronger coils and maybe this is the reason I don't see it. Or my watt meter is just crap in this regard.
EDIT:
Easiest way to measure this is to put 1:1 trafo in front and measure primary side of this. Maybe step down trafo could be used aswell, but then something else is needed as load as 230 V bulbs stop working at lower voltage.
@Noskil
The file report.zip not open
Leo48
T-1000 I watched all those links in russian a few times I understand no russian. I see excited people and equipment and circuits. I have a 1000Watt variac/ one constant voltage trafco 15 amps, one LARGE older neon sign DUAL trafco. Can anyone make a finer detail schematic of the circuit for us?
Here is simplified circuit, hopefully it will be more easy to understand it now.
P.S> Ampmeter1 and Ampmeter2 will show different values in real life situation, you should seek for this condition first.
I will start high frequency experiments. I got PC, goldwave audio editor, audio amplifier that can spit out 260 watts of power, nanoperm toroids, and most importantly, lots of beer cause its friday. I might have a few ones if I am successfull. If not then down the drain it goes. So stakes are very high.
I try exact replication first, no fancy winds but just plain coils. With this method I don't think there needs to be power circulating, just power pressure.
Already played a bit, about 5 meters (50 turns) of wire on nanoperm at 15 kHz significantly lowers the audio volume, speaker is in series with the coil. If I put 560 meters of wire interleaved bifilar (several thousand turns), audio volume is much louder. This is fun stuff, and safe.
I will try this next:
First one coil, enough turns that nothing is heard when volume is at maximum. Then second coil, more turns so it steps up from 5 volts to 220 volts. I will try different waveforms. Maybe I get amps from audio amplifier and then volts from the second coil that runs the load. Load would then get amps and volts. Lets see what happens.
Both coils always in same direction. If you are uncertain about direction then connect coil across load one way and if it does not work then try other way.
I was unable to see any notable effect at higher frequencies. In fact watt meter showed always more consumption than lamp used. I could not measure what went in the trafos, I measured directly from the wall and amplifier was always after it. I think to get more power there would need to be a tank circuit that is pulsed in first trafo and resonance there using cap. After this is achieved second trafo could be used to take the power without affecting the tank circuit. See this link from TK thread:
http://tarielkapanadze.ru/science-eng.htm (http://tarielkapanadze.ru/science-eng.htm)
No way I dare do experiments like this. I could easily make such a simple circuit and then do a pulse sweep with goldwave. If I would hit resonant frequency voltage would possibly go skyhigh and don't think my PC would like it especially if there would be sparks involved. For a self runner I got now second part of the puzzle (the harder one), first one is explained above. Maybe they already have working second part, did not investigate the site further. Someone needs to carry this on as I do not dare to continue from this point.
In this case winding direction does not matter, only the polarities which you can easily find out by swapping the second coil. In the junction of the two coils polarities must be the same at the same time instant.
qwert, I have read the patent and there is usefull information there. Problem with it is that you need to tune it every time load changes. With this setup this tuning is not required, atleast not at 50 Hz frequency when coil impedance is high enough.
I will try to make normal tank circuit using goldwave, if I can find resonant frequency somehow then maybe I can proceed.
Questions:
1. Did you used secondaries placed on E+I core on center "leg" ? If so then maybe winding direction does not matter. I'm trying to use transformer with 0 core (two "c" cores together) , bobbins are on each side of "0"
2. Do you think that your original modification have the same amount of windings in primary and secondary and the same length of wire (roughly) ? Do you think it may be important ?
In this case winding direction does not matter, only the polarities which you can easily find out by swapping the second coil. In the junction of the two coils polarities must be the same at the same time instant.
Think in terms of poles S and N, polarities. When current goes via coil one end will be S and the other will be N. If you put two coils together and winding direction is the same, you get S-N-S-N. In fact each turn in a coil forms S-N and when connected they form one S-N electromagnet.
Idea is to connect those coils so they form S-N-N-S electromagnet and you connect load to either S-N or N-S. Easiest way is to try the two bulb experiment, first L-coil-bulb1-bulb2-N, then one coil parallel to bulb1. When bulb2 is not lit or dimmer than bulb1 then coil is connected correctly.
What is the permeability of your core and what is the DC resistance or you coil ? Can you compute AC resistance (impedance) at your operating frequency ?
HellO!
maybe this will help you:
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/11855-eric-dollard-6.html#post209190 (http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/11855-eric-dollard-6.html#post209190)
Regards
Anyway, trafo setup used here is better because it does not use input power at all even when load is taken.Could you please provide the best video link demonstrating this claim?
Maybe of topic here, but this setup seems to be worth trying:
Plasma Ignition - Water Sparkplug Circuit by Peter Lindemann
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vOhNtRhJ5Rw (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vOhNtRhJ5Rw)
Even though Peter does claim OU, it's obviously raising the output voltage at the sparc gap . The sparc gap itself is a small capacitor. The Output Energy to the cap is squared to the voltage.
What happens is my speculation, it might not be correct so it does not make sense to draw diagram about it. There is also an option that watt meter gives me wrong results because load is inductive. Current limiter bulb might give wrong result also, current is going through it but voltage is not high enough to affect light brightness, so this should be measured using proper meter.
If you can create the two bulb scenario where limiter bulb has no light but output bulb has light, then measure current that come in and then voltage across L and N, that is between L and both sides of the limiter bulb. If this voltage is close to 0 volts, then power is not being used as much though there is current going, is this correct ? If possible, try to measure using both setups.
Earlier measurement have shown that voltage drop over limiter bulb is only few volts, what does it mean ? Obviously limiter bulb is not using power, but does it mean that the entire circuit is not using any power from source ?
As you see, there are still questions that should be answered but I don't have proper instruments. I hope you, or someone else can clarify in detail what is going on in this little circuit when using coils that have high enough impedance. Tank circuit works too so it is not necessary to wind lots of wire for the coils.
As Jack has described, GoldWave will do what you need in the audio range, it just needs a little programming.
But why not invest in a decent function generator with sweep capability? The FG, along with the oscilloscope, is the basis of any setup for looking at resonant circuits or just electronics tinkering in general.
Any signal generator will allow you to sweep manually, and you can just stop turning the knob when you see the resonant voltage rise on the scope, and read off the numbers from the FG's or scope's display. Most common, low-end FGs these days will cover a range up to 3 or 5 MHz and many also even include sweep function.
I have an old Interstate F34 Sweep Function Generator that I use for coil tuning, letting it sweep automatically, but this is a luxury. It's easy enough to do manually with the right tools.
%Notes:
% - The duration should be set longer than this example for
%better low frequency accuracy
%
% - You can change the starting phase angle which is an
%optional parameter for chirp.
%Clean up workspace
clear;
clc;
%Inputs
StartFreq=1; %Hz
EndFreq=100; %Hz
Duration=2; %Seconds
SampleRate=48000; %Samples per second
OutputFile='MySweep.wav'; %Output filename
%Set time frame
t=1/SampleRate; %Time period
tp=0:t:Duration; %Time over duration
%Generate swept output signal with chirp (normalized)
OutSignal=chirp(tp,StartFreq,Duration,EndFreq);
%Save generated signal to wave file
wavwrite(OutSignal,SampleRate,32,OutputFile);
Answer is simple. I'm short on money and function generators are costly. Do you know maybe about any cheap one , maybe extension slot for PC ?I advise not using PC plugin cards. Unless of course you can afford the quality and performance of NI products and software like LabView.
Hi Forest,
If you need to generate more specific frequencies I suggest Octave(which is Open Source).
http://www.gnu.org/software/octave/ (http://www.gnu.org/software/octave/)
Using the chirp function is a snap to generate swept frequencies or any other kind of signal. You can keep changing the parameters until you narrow down the frequency range.
Quick example:
You can also play the signal out to the soundcard directly but it depends on if your computer will recognize the command(soundsc). soundsc(OutSignal,SampleRate);
Hi TinselKoala,
The max frequency range for some sound cards is around 20khz. A dedicated frequency generator would be better but it depends on how much Forest wants to spend.
forest,Beautiful work! It's nice that you go into the circuit operation theory as well as just providing schematics.
As an option, build one or two of these.
In my tests I used 220 V / 50 Hz mains.Please provide a link to any replication substantiating a claim of OU.
Simulation does not match real world in this case.
We have seen replications from forest and TheCell, I picked up 3 V from forest's results. I think it was voltage drop across bulb A, so this needs verification. Bulb A shows almost no light while bulb B shows light.
At the moment I am not aware of successfull replication.:o
We have seen replications from forest and TheCell, I picked up 3 V from forest's results. I think it was voltage drop across bulb A, so this needs verification. Bulb A shows almost no light while bulb B shows light.
...Did anybody notice that this configuration is just a plain auto-transformer? For a 1:1 winding ratio the output voltage will be half of the input....
I have to say, I'm a beginner in electronics, so my mind is not yet blocked by the dogmata of "accepted science ". 8)
All naysaying accomplishes is to stifle free thinking.
Can't you see that ?
You discourage creative thought of other tinkerers with negativity.
Let people find their own way, they may stumble on to something along the way.
Nobody is getting scammed by this concept, so just allow people time and space to dream think build.
Its not that hard...all you have to do is be silent and let things unfold in a natural spontaneous way.
Who knows, you may see something that takes you in the right direction.
But that can't happen when you are making noise and not listening.
Regards...
I am finding extremely hard to believe you are too dense to understand what I am saying.
I will leave it at that Regards...
Here is just the latest reason for the so called experts in a particular field to mind their own business and stick to their own research and leave the "ignorant and the uneducated" be.YES!!!!!!!! This should be made a STICKY! Agree 100%
" Discovered by accident
As to the new method, it was pretty much discovered by accident. According to the Boston Globe:
Dr. Charles Vacanti is an unlikely protagonist for one of the most startling scientific discoveries in years.
The genial 63-year-old anesthesiologist who left stem cell (http://www.naturalnews.com/stem_cell.html) scientists shaking their heads in wonder and puzzlement last week, with the discovery that a simple acid bath could be used to generate powerful stem cells, doesn't even have a PhD.
Vacanti is an accomplished tissue engineer and the chairman of the Anesthesiology Department at Brigham and Women's Hospital, but he's a virtual outsider to the highly competitive and fast-moving stem cell field. ...
His discovery is a reminder that as specialized as science is, sometimes, a little ignorance may be a virtue. A stem-cell expert would probably never have even bothered to try the experiment Vacanti has been pursuing, on and off, since the late 1990s."Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/043843_stem_cells_scientific_breakthrough_pluripotency.html#ixzz2syk6Ekbx (http://www.naturalnews.com/043843_stem_cells_scientific_breakthrough_pluripotency.html#ixzz2syk6Ekbx)
[/color]
I rest my case...again...for the umpteenth time.
But some people just don't seem to get it, and likely never will...that most significant advancements in a particular field are 'discovered by accident'.
Regards...And your next post:
All naysaying accomplishes is to stifle free thinking.
Can't you see that ?
You discourage creative thought of other tinkerers with negativity.
Let people find their own way, they may stumble on to something along the way.
Nobody is getting scammed by this concept, so just allow people time and space to dream think build.
Its not that hard...all you have to do is be silent and let things unfold in a natural spontaneous way.
Who knows, you may see something that takes you in the right direction.
But that can't happen when you are making noise and not listening.
Regards...
So why we stupid people keep on making systems that are such where all energy is wasted inside the transformer core ?Maybe you should learn how perform proper measurements before calling people stupid ;)
I have a questions for experts:What circuit does this refer to?
Why the input light had not light or heat while the output light had light and heat ?
I see you and your ilk on these forums as, at best bullies...who cannot resist the compulsion to dominate all discussion with a superior attitude...I'm sure others besides myself and member 'dieter' can see it also.
At worst, you are here to disrupt all relevant topics.
Not a good choice...but your output needs no scopes or gauges to measure...it is what it is.
Now wood be a good time play on everyone's sympathies with your ill health...again.
As if you are the only one with problems.
I posted that stem cell break through info here for a reason...interesting how you didn't see how it would apply to your health condition...just an observation.
Regards...
Wow you insult me "call me dense" then when I react you call me a bully, OMG hilarious. Bully is a word children use.
And I was already aware of the stem cell research on problems relating to mine, you think I am ignorant now, you think you know all and need to tell me about it. I never seek sympathy, only understanding that I can not always experiment when I wish. Many of us have health problems and are restricted by them, do they all seek sympathy when stating they have issues. I have a visit with the neurosurgeon next week. Maybe he will fix me again maybe he won't I don't decide the treatment they offer, I only decide if I accept it.
You are the "bully" friend not I and if you want to get personal come to my house and we will see who asks for sympathy, grot. I might be suffering great pain but I can still look after myself.
..
Sorry to ask but when you say:
4. Removed first trafo and used trafo connected as explained here. Same results as in case 3, but now a bit more light because less losses.
What you meen? What is the schematic of your best result? Does it use only one isolation transformer insted of 2?
Thank you! :)