Language: 
To browser these website, it's necessary to store cookies on your computer.
The cookies contain no personal information, they are required for program control.
  the storage of cookies while browsing this website, on Login and Register.

GDPR and DSGVO law

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

Google Search

Custom Search

Author Topic: Tesla's "COIL FOR ELECTRO-MAGNETS".  (Read 440234 times)

Offline conradelektro

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1838
Re: Tesla's "COIL FOR ELECTRO-MAGNETS".
« Reply #645 on: January 15, 2014, 08:58:38 PM »
Some great clips from Itsu:

Pick-up coil for a pulse motor configured in parallel resonance:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=syxL4f2OsPg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yNtnLAVk9Og

Pick-up coil for a pulse motor configured in serial resonance:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K-avee5Z1oU

I would like to discuss and to understand the issues involved in these "rotor speeds up under load" claims.


The set up:

- some sort of pulse motor (or an ordinary electric motor) is pinning a rotor carrying magnets

- a pick up coil (in front of the spinning magnets) picks up electricity and drives a load (or is under no load)

- a certain amount of power is necessary to drive the rotor and the rotor spins with a certain speed


The claim:

- if the pick up coil is burdened with a heavier load (or even shortened) the speed of the rotor increases and the power demand to drive the rotor goes down


Oservation:

- I get the impression (when watching a video of these experiments) that the power necessary to drive the rotor is always very much higher than the power generated by the pick up coil. (Which leads to the question: why is this an OU claim? It is an interesting effect, but OU can not be achieved?)


Further observation:

- This "parallel resonance" (pick up coil LC circuit should have the same frequency as the AC generated by the spinning magnets) is just one of the theories involved and might not even be the explanation?


What is your opinion and how do you see these experiments, e.g. the one Itsu is showing in his videos (I mean the videos cited by MileHigh).

Greetings, Conrad

Offline conradelektro

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1838
Re: Tesla's "COIL FOR ELECTRO-MAGNETS".
« Reply #646 on: January 15, 2014, 09:13:02 PM »
I put all the measurement circuits and calculators I learned in the last month into the attached PDF-file.

May be that helps others to climb the learning curve faster than I did. The experts will not need this collection.

Again, thank you MileHigh and Gyula for the time you spent on teaching these useful skills.

Greetings, Conrad

Offline synchro1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4647
Re: Tesla's "COIL FOR ELECTRO-MAGNETS".
« Reply #647 on: January 15, 2014, 09:58:57 PM »
Synchro, mate...

 1) That vid above by Stephen Jones, has to be one of the worst conducted experiments I've ever seen... It's terrible.

 2) The experiments you keep ranting about are *so easy to do yourself* - that your ranting is ridiculous.

 3) Your attitude towards Conrad & MH is out-of-order!

Just do the damn experiment yourself. For goodness sake!

I'm beginning to be quite irked by people who are not prepared to do their own !$%&# experiments!


I've uploaded close to forty experimental videos. I've repeated this experiment scores of times. Now think about this: Milehigh never uploaded any videos ever, nor has he ever ever done so much as one experiment. So that looks like you're the pot calling the kettle black to me!

It's not so important who's doing an experiment; What's important is that the experiment's done correctly, and if done incorrectly that the mistakes are pointed out and understood. Now I started out with a tank circuit, and it was jettisoned by Milehigh and we got mistaken results. The test was faulty as a result of improvising solutions and not sticking to the directions. It's important for people to know why the test failed! I sought to cultivate a working friendship with Conradelektro, and Milehigh stepped in and puppeteered the novice experimenter, with his "pseudo-expertise" into sidetracking the original design for a failed alteration!


The way in which Dr. Steven Jones conducted his experiment has very little to do with his choice of components to match with the BPC. He did choose to wire resistors onto output circuit!

Offline Farmhand

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1583
Re: Tesla's "COIL FOR ELECTRO-MAGNETS".
« Reply #648 on: January 15, 2014, 10:15:46 PM »
I've been saying for a long time that the speed up under load effects are effects of resonance or harmonics. And I've shown it, Notice the voltage waveform is much reduced on load and the rotor is loaded to produce parallel resonance in the pickup coil meaning the loading on the motor and the input to the tank is highest at resonance to maintain the activity in the tank against the losses. When the setup speeds up due to the activity being reduced by load this indicate a reduced load on the prime mover.

I'm intrigued are you saying that you can continually excite a tank to parallel resonance with no input ? This is one of the reasons I usually say at or near resonance.

In practice the impedance is never near infinite because of the losses, as the tank stores energy there are always losses and so there is always input, and when at parallel resonance the voltage and activity is highest so the losses are highest and the input is highest with no load. In my experience. Now when we load a parallel resonant tank with a resistive load we lower the Q of the tank and energy is removed the activity in the tank is less and the losses are less and so there is less input required to maintain that.

If the tank had a near infinite impedance at resonance the input should get less the closer we get to parallel resonance.

In practice with most of the setups I have experimented with when the parallel tank is excited to resonance input is required to keep it there and the input is usually more than to run the transformer without parallel resonance.

Anyway as I said Tesla never mentioned resonance in the patent and I was using the term adjusting to resonance to describe tuning a tank to maximum activity with a load attached.

With no load and no losses a parallel tank would oscillate for ever and the input would see an infinite impedance continuously and the input would go to nothing continously but in practice this does not happen ever. Even in a resonator not directly loaded.

Try this experiment make a low resistance tank circuit and excite it with DC pulses of say 12 volts to maximum amplitude (parallel resonance) note the input as you do it, then place a 10 Ohm resistor on the tank, and re-tune to maximum amplitude (won't take much) then note the input.

What I imagine will happen is as the circuit is tuned around near to resonance is the input will go up and it's max will be when the amplitude is max. The lower the Q the more input will be required to maintain it.

You see practically the experimenter who wants max power throughput is not so concerned with perfect resonance, the object is maximum activity in a loaded tank to produce the highest output.

..

If you skip to about 2:40 in this video you can see the effect of the resistive load on the waveform and shortly after compared to the somewhat capacitive load of the fluro tube. The tube causes the activity to increase due to better resonance and the input also increases. The filament bulb reduces activity by removing energy and the input drops.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zxde9qga79c

I call these (effects of resonance or near resonance). At about 9:30 I show the effect of the fluro. The resonance is improved with the fluro and the input is increased.

I understand the "ideal" properties of parallel and series resonance being infinite and nil respectively. But I'm not concerned with that I'm concerned with practical use.

And I'm also concerned with showing the speed up under load effect can be done by a hack like me if we know why it happens.  :) And that it is nothing fantastic or out of normal
nor is it much use for anything.

I think we can all agree on one thing, the speed up under load effect touted as something special is a load of bogus.

..

I'm not sure about others but I'm usually tuning for maximum output to a load when I experiment with resonant setups. The input only concerns me where efficiency is concerned if it is one of my concerns.

..

I came to my conclusions on Thanes bogus speed up under load effect all by myself and I showed actual setups demonstrating it, many months ago. And I immediately recognized it as useless and a serious loss.

Whats to learn about that ? I had a theory and I tested it, I got the results I expected. I didn't need anyone else to tell me it was bogus, I could see it plain as day on first viewing of his video's, it was bogus through and through.

..


Offline Farmhand

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1583
Re: Tesla's "COIL FOR ELECTRO-MAGNETS".
« Reply #649 on: January 15, 2014, 11:13:35 PM »
Another way the voltage might effect the frequency is by the higher voltage causing more current through the resistance and engaging the core better.

..

I don't see a tank capacitor as an output "load" in itself. It is a parasitic load, similar to the resistance of the wire in the coil.

..

An unloaded tank is a pointless exercise isn't it, as far as output goes.

..

Offline synchro1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4647
Re: Tesla's "COIL FOR ELECTRO-MAGNETS".
« Reply #650 on: January 15, 2014, 11:23:38 PM »
Another way the voltage might effect the frequency is by the higher voltage causing more current through the resistance and engaging the core better.

..

I don't see a tank capacitor as an output "load" in itself. It is a parasitic load, similar to the resistance of the wire in the coil.

..

An unloaded tank is a pointless exercise isn't it, as far as output goes.

..


What's your point here, that resonance starves power from the circuit, and that "Lenz delay effect" is a return to normal?

Offline MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7600
Re: Tesla's "COIL FOR ELECTRO-MAGNETS".
« Reply #651 on: January 16, 2014, 04:57:23 AM »
Conrad:

I sold the Synchro Coil Joy Buzzer patent to Google Jokes!  We are rich!  lol

Quote
I get the impression (when watching a video of these experiments) that the power necessary to drive the rotor is always very much higher than the power generated by the pick up coil.

I think that nearly all of us would agree with that statement.

Quote
This "parallel resonance" (pick up coil LC circuit should have the same frequency as the AC generated by the spinning magnets) is just one of the theories involved and might not even be the explanation?

This is true with one caveat.  The passing magnets might be at the LC circuit/pickup coil resonance frequency, but the EMF waveform that they generate in the pickup coil is usually not even close to a sine wave.  You can see the induced EMF waveform in one of Itsu's clips when he disconnects the capacitor and the load.  So the excitation has many higher harmonic frequencies that more or less are filtered out by the LC pickup coil circuit.  You can see how the sine wave on the scope display is quite distorted because of this.

To answer your question in a general sense, if you change the configuration of your motor or pickup coil, then it's reasonable to assume that some parameters will change.  You can look at that as an A-B comparison test investigation.  You also can do a second investigation to see how the change affects were the input power goes as it flows through the motor.  For example, if you make a change, the motor efficiency with respect to (output RPM/input power) might increase.  The average power consumption may also decrease.  Depending on how those variables change between the "A" version of the motor and the "B" version, the rotor can speed up while the power consumption decreases.  The key to understanding this is to do your best to track and measure the "waste power," i.e.; the input electrical power that becomes waste heat power.

So it's possible that pick-up coils in LC resonance give you a more efficient motor for a given efficiency parameter.  You can just try to measure the different electrical, mechanical, heat, and useful output power levels.  That would document what the LC resonance does to improve your efficiency.  You also have the option to do a full timing analysis and actually document and measure exactly what the pickup coil in LC resonance does with a full timing diagram.  That will explain everything and explain what the resonance is actually doing.

Everything I state above is what is "hiding behind the curtain" when people use the term "the delayed Lenz effect."  I believe that the popular notion is that the change in configuration of the motor delays the arrival of the magnetic repulsion on the spinning rotor and therefore the rotor speeds up.  Some may believe that you are getting something for nothing because the power consumption did not increase.  However, perhaps the first assumption before making real measurements would be to assume nothing!  Then perhaps make a basic assumption that the motor became more efficient, and some of the input electrical power that was being lost as waste heat power is now being directed to pumping mechanical power into the rotor and speeding it up.   So:  Less waste heat power and more rotor mechanical power - which is of course an improvement in the performance of the motor.  BUT, you have to make all of the measurements to prove your assumption is true.

MileHigh

Offline MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7600
Re: Tesla's "COIL FOR ELECTRO-MAGNETS".
« Reply #652 on: January 16, 2014, 05:54:54 AM »
Farmhand:

Quote
I'm intrigued are you saying that you can continually excite a tank to parallel resonance with no input ? This is one of the reasons I usually say at or near resonance.

You may want to check the formulas for the resonance frequencies of series and parallel RLC circuits.  The frequency is probably not dependent on the resistance.  Of course the resistance drains power in the resonator.  You figure if you chose the best type of capacitor with the lowest ESR and a coil with fat wire and not too long a length of wire, you could increase the time constant of the exponential decay of the resonator.  It might even be a fun experiment because you could have a friendly competition for who can extend the decay out the longest.

So for the parallel LCR resonator, the impedance is not infinite like you say.  You can imagine that the AC signal from the signal generator at the signal generator source is always slightly higher in voltage than the resonator voltage at the resonator.  So that means that current from the signal generator is slowly seeping into the LCR resonator to compensate for the losses.  There is a very very slight voltage drop along the length of the signal generator cable due to the current seepage.  If you have a very good LC resonator connected to the signal generator with very low ohmic resistance in the LC circuit, that translates into very high impedance in the parallel LC resonator.  Therefore the current seepage from the signal generator to replenish the resonator will be very low.  So perhaps the voltage drop along the cable will only be a few hundred microvolts.

I am always concious of this stuff.  However, it's understood among the "pros" that you don't have to mention it all the time.  It simply makes discussion easier.

MileHigh

Offline Farmhand

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1583
Re: Tesla's "COIL FOR ELECTRO-MAGNETS".
« Reply #653 on: January 16, 2014, 06:25:13 AM »
I didn't say the resistor itself would change the frequency of resonance. However the extra loading of the tank means there must be input to maintain activity, in practice most loads have some inductance/capacitance and resistance.

Anyway I think we mostly all agree about the folly of the speed up under load effect. I showed what I could, to do what I could to try to improve understanding and save some people some hype disappointment. I certainly do not begrudge others doing the same in their way.

The main thing is I was discerning enough to realize it was BS.

All I can say is many of us have contributed to slaying this false hope.

..


Offline Farmhand

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1583
Re: Tesla's "COIL FOR ELECTRO-MAGNETS".
« Reply #654 on: January 16, 2014, 06:30:41 AM »
My theory about the voltage and the frequency is just that "a theory" that I would need to prove for it to be an accepted theory, If I cannot prove it then I would have to admit it is a flawed theory, so you can sue me then.  ;D

Cheers

Offline MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7600
Re: Tesla's "COIL FOR ELECTRO-MAGNETS".
« Reply #655 on: January 16, 2014, 06:39:35 AM »
Farmhand:

I looked at parts of your clip.  You can see how you are investigating both the power measurement approach and the waveform approach to your circuit and when you switch in different types of loads, etc.  So it's along the lines of what I discussed but it's not the complete set of measurements to get the complete picture.  One thing I did not touch on in my previous posting also worth mentioning is by now an old theme:  If you change the load, you assume that you change the overall impedance of the entire setup.  That will change the power consumption and could have other effects related to impedance matching and rotor speed, etc.

It's a lot of work to 100% dissect a circuit and if you go to school it's an exercise that you might only do a few times.  It might be for your course project or something.  Then you can apply that general knowledge and the underlying principles to similar circuits.  There must be hundreds of delayed Lenz clips and "reduction in power when load added" clips so there has go to be a lot of commonality among them.  So you can make some generalizations, but you can't apply that generalization to one specific example clip.  You have to roll up your shirtsleeves and do the work on your circuit if you want a definitive explanation for what is going on.  Of course you can also run sims.

MileHigh

Offline Farmhand

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1583
Re: Tesla's "COIL FOR ELECTRO-MAGNETS".
« Reply #656 on: January 16, 2014, 06:53:24 AM »
Yes, you see the battery voltage rise under the reduced load of the filament bulb and drop under the real load of the fluro tube. And at teh end I power a 100 Watt bulb and a large shaded pole motor the motor I power with a capacitor in series.  ;)

Well I'm not all that concerned with a definitive explanation, I shown myself with several different setups that the effect is bogus and that is good enough for me. If others do not accept my experiments as an indicator then they can do their own experiments and find their own results.

In my experience an efficient transformer has a low idle input and high efficiency at full intended load. I have no use for a system that uses a lot of power to just run at idle then it uses less when loaded.

All the time and effort I put in was to show others what I see, not for my benefit. Although I do learn as I go of course.

..

Offline synchro1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4647
Re: Tesla's "COIL FOR ELECTRO-MAGNETS".
« Reply #657 on: January 16, 2014, 03:53:18 PM »

@Farmhand,

I built a very simple reed switch pulse motor with a bifilar wrap around a plastic plumber latex tape spool,
one loop for power the other for output. The magnet tube rotor spun inside the coil core. When I attached the output leads to a capacitor, the rotor accelerated. Shorting the output leads increased the effect. I couldn't explain the effect. It was very observable. Now I'm hearing it's some kind of bogus effect, after years of tests and research.


What about JLN's tests? What did he conclude? Have a look at this straight forward video and try and identify the "bogus" part:


"Here an interesting experiment about the Delayed Lenz Effect which shows that the normal Lenz effect can be reversed with a special setup":

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YUoyuiQTrRA&feature=player_embedded


JLN clearly demonstrates that at a distance of 1mm the shorted output coil increases input and slows the rotor. Then at a distance of 30mm the shorted coil decreases input and speeds the rotor up! Where's the bogus part in this test. Talk is cheap Farmhand!

There's seems to be some kind of persistent witch hunt pattern among members of this discussion group to placate the geo resource mind set, that's devoid of any constructive content; Just start to kick the stuffing out of any hope for free energy for the fun of it. What's up with that kind of dark age inquisition routine?


Here are JLN's observations:


How the Delayed Lenz Effect (DLE) can be observed ?

In the case of the motors/generators, the increase of the turn rate is produced by the DLE when the devices are loaded,

In the case of solid state generator or special transformers (i.e. the Thane C. Heins' Bitt) , a drop of the input power is observed when a load is connected at the output,

In the case of the generators, the increase of the turn rate is produced by the DLE when the devices are loaded above a critical minimum frequency. Below the critical minimum frequency the DLE coil will produce deceleration as per any conventional Lenz generator coil. Coil frequency dictates coil impedance which is a critical factor in producing generator DLE and on-load system acceleration.

The greater the load i.e. the closer it is to a dead short (an infinite number of resistors connected in parallel) the greater the DLE produced and the more system acceleration will be produced.

The DLE can also be used to produce an unbalance (sink effect) between the outside (i.e the Earth ground) and the load, this is the case of the Tariel Kapanadze generator...

JLN clearly shows that the motor runs more efficiently with the output coil placed at 30mm than without it, and less efficiently at 1mm, where it induces "Lenz drag". This is a very, very important observation. It's wrong to trivialize it!

Then along comes Farmhand and his Petrophile fraternity from "Salem"!

Lenz's law is not all inclusive, but needs to be amended to include the inverse corollary of "Lenz acceleration" along with the principle of "Lenz drag". This is not a bogus effect!

Offline synchro1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4647
Re: Tesla's "COIL FOR ELECTRO-MAGNETS".
« Reply #658 on: January 16, 2014, 05:37:35 PM »

Cool new video from Skycollection:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LsVrQ_ThrV0

Offline conradelektro

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1838
Re: Tesla's "COIL FOR ELECTRO-MAGNETS".
« Reply #659 on: January 16, 2014, 05:53:31 PM »
Yes, you see the battery voltage rise under the reduced load of the filament bulb and drop under the real load of the fluro tube. And at teh end I power a 100 Watt bulb and a large shaded pole motor the motor I power with a capacitor in series.  ;)

Well I'm not all that concerned with a definitive explanation, I shown myself with several different setups that the effect is bogus and that is good enough for me. If others do not accept my experiments as an indicator then they can do their own experiments and find their own results.

In my experience an efficient transformer has a low idle input and high efficiency at full intended load. I have no use for a system that uses a lot of power to just run at idle then it uses less when loaded.

All the time and effort I put in was to show others what I see, not for my benefit. Although I do learn as I go of course.

..

@Farmhand: I agree that you showed with very simple means that a "speed up effect under load", or better said "a lower power demand under certain load conditions", can be reproduced.

For me it also shows that this is nothing to get overly excited about. But you can never convince a "believer", they want to believe in magic no matter what you show them.

Greetings, Conrad