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

Custom Search

### Author Topic: Tesla's "COIL FOR ELECTRO-MAGNETS".  (Read 508804 times)

#### Magluvin

• Hero Member
• Posts: 5884
##### Re: Tesla's "COIL FOR ELECTRO-MAGNETS".
« Reply #705 on: January 18, 2014, 10:32:47 PM »
Being that bifi capacitance of coils with few turns is not in the freq range we are looking for, many turns will have layers also. This layering complicates, but also increases the amount of total capacitance of the coil as a whole. Each adjacent bifi pair capacitance is not all there is. Each layer being adjacent to the next layer creates more contact area around each wire, so more capacitance.

I dont believe that there is a calculator out there for predicting capacitance values of a bifi. If we were to make say 3 different coils, same wire, different number of turns, then say 3 sets of 3 using small wire in one set, medium then large in the last set, then a chart could be made. Then formula's can be developed from the charts.  Smaller wire will reduce the air space between the roundness of the wires, therefor increasing capacitance compared to thicker wire.

So twisting 6 smaller wires to equal 2 larger wires in conductivity will have more capacitance due to more physical contact areas, and reducing the amount of air space between non contact areas of the wires that are in very close proximity to each other.

Mags

#### Magluvin

• Hero Member
• Posts: 5884
##### Re: Tesla's "COIL FOR ELECTRO-MAGNETS".
« Reply #706 on: January 18, 2014, 11:00:12 PM »
If trying to make consistent bifilar coils, they need to be wound very neatly. Each bifi pair or wires also are in physical contact with the next pair of windings, along with proximity to layers along the way. Any sloppy winding and consistency is lost. Any sloppy spacing and capacity suffers. I prefer enameled wire for closest proximity for highest capacitance, where rubber insulated wire puts a lot of distance between turns, reducing capacitance. The more capacitance we can produce, without increasing the number of turns, the better as we will have the least amount of resistance.

Square wire would help increase capacitance a bunch I believe.

http://www.unitedwirecompany.com/squarewire/index.htm

http://www.mwswire.com/square.htm

Mags

#### synchro1

• Hero Member
• Posts: 4720
##### Re: Tesla's "COIL FOR ELECTRO-MAGNETS".
« Reply #707 on: January 18, 2014, 11:17:07 PM »
Like I said earlier, testing the 2 coils on a Leedskalnin holder would give definitive data in my opinion. If done properly one could truly measure if there is more field and how much. Part of my tests will do measurements with linear hall sensors.

Still working on the coil winding setup. I only want to do it once without wire breakage.

Mags

Comparing milli joules of PMH coil pulse current to horsepower of locking force on the magnet keeper would surly yield some kind of mega-overunity COP!

This PMH video is interesting because he imparts a powerful motion to the iron keeper with the pulse:

This video appears perhaps to open the possibility for some kind of motor based on this effect. Mr. Anguswangus experimented with this kind of pulse power coil, but he used magnets on his rotor and not iron. The rotor magnet attraction to the iron PMH core helps on the approach, but hurts on the exit after a repulsion pulse from the PMH. The iron core suffers saturation from the rotor magnets, and the attraction power is really where the dividends are with this setup, not the repulsion force. I think a large rotor beam with two upright iron keepers on each end and two horseshoe PMH magnets on opposite sides might make a powerful attraction overunity motor! Think about the kind of permanent magnetic quantum level force that's involved. This has nothing to do with normal pulse coil rotor magnet repulsion! The large iron keepers would just continue to fly by the thick PMH cores with no back attraction like the Anguswangus rotor magnets create!

Eight PMH power coils and eight iron rotor bars would allow the motor to alternate a firing sequence to stagger the PMH power pulses enough to avoid core and rotor bar saturation. I built a motor like this with rotor magnets, and one PMH pulse coil but it failed due to core saturation and I gave up.

#### Farmhand

• Hero Member
• Posts: 1583
##### Re: Tesla's "COIL FOR ELECTRO-MAGNETS".
« Reply #708 on: January 19, 2014, 04:06:05 AM »
Conrad, unfortunately I made a real rookie stuff up and crossed my FG connections, so I removed that video, it did have the effect of showing other things, but my words did make me look the fool so I had no choice but to remove it. That was a kind of unrelated experiment even though there were some things to see and hints of things to experiment with.

I'm glad you caught it but it did not show what I thought it was showing, once I realized something was not right I made a third check and seen my mistake then removed the video.

Experiments are continuing but with a clearer head and more connection checking. I'm no expert, I'm very much a learner.  Obviously. But I can see, and realize when things don't add up if I think about it enough. I hope to have a clearer head tomorrow.

So I say my last video experiment that I removed was flawed and invalid. My bad. I'll be more attentive in future. And check three times.

Cheers

I do have another experiment showing a similar effect but genuine and I will redo that one, this one will be a 50 Hz experiment. My apologies for the bad video experiment. I had several distractions but make no excuses.

..

#### gyulasun

• Hero Member
• Posts: 4117
##### Re: Tesla's "COIL FOR ELECTRO-MAGNETS".
« Reply #709 on: January 19, 2014, 02:33:02 PM »
@Gyula,

Quote from Gyula:

"Why do you attribute to Itsu things he obviously did not do?  He did not lower the CMF for DLE to 18,000 rpm with his resonant output coil! In his parallel resonance video the highest frequency from his generator coil output was 206 Hz (this is 12,360 rpm and this latter rpm  occured when he shorted the output), no any higher rpm was demonstrated.  How can you claim he lowered it to 18,000 rpm??   (For the other members: Itsu's video is here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=syxL4f2OsPg )"

Look, Itsu's running four magnets at 150 hertz RPM. That's 9,000 RPM equal to 18,000 RPM for the diametric. Now your raising his speed to 206 Hertz which would yield an equivilant of 24,720 for a diametric frequency. Then you ask me how come I'm attributing a rate of 18,000 RPM's to Itsu!

I maintained the critical minimum frequency for a diametric spinner to catch DLE was 25,000 RPM's. Itsu caught it at 9,000 RPM's which would equate to 18,000 RPM's for a diametric magnet, 7,000 RPM's less then where I get it with my spiral output coil and sphere spinner. JLN's spinning at 30,000 RPM with his diametric in his test.

synchro01:

Speaking of Itsu's motor setup in his parallel resonant video, he had 4 magnets on the rotor and he used one generator coil. This meant that he got induction 4 times per one revolution of the rotor, right?  Now this means that checking the RPM of his rotor with a tachometer when the scope shows 150 Hz, the tachometer would display 9,000/4 = 2,250 RPM only and not 9,000 as you would think. For your diametric magnet case then the actual RPM would be 2 times 2,250 = 4,500! (at least as per following your logic of calculation for the diametric magnet case from Itsu's 4 magnet case when you say Itsu's RPM of 9,000 is equal to 18,000 RPM for the diametric magnet case)
This all means that your tachometer readings on the reflective tape attached to your spinner needs rechecking or you calculations needs checking?

It is okay that we all make mistakes,  however you again attributed to me a thing what Itsu did: it was Itsu who was raising his rotor speed to 206 Hz in his video, I just referred to it as the maximum speed occuring in his video, and I meant it to prove that your forever mentioned 18,000 RPM was not even approached in his video: still you wrote that he lowered the rotor speed to 18,000 RPM... lowered from what speed then??  (You wrote it in your Reply #691)

Gyula

#### synchro1

• Hero Member
• Posts: 4720
##### Re: Tesla's "COIL FOR ELECTRO-MAGNETS".
« Reply #710 on: January 19, 2014, 03:22:05 PM »

synchro01:

Speaking of Itsu's motor setup in his parallel resonant video, he had 4 magnets on the rotor and he used one generator coil. This meant that he got induction 4 times per one revolution of the rotor, right?  Now this means that checking the RPM of his rotor with a tachometer when the scope shows 150 Hz, the tachometer would display 9,000/4 = 2,250 RPM only and not 9,000 as you would think. For your diametric magnet case then the actual RPM would be 2 times 2,250 = 4,500! (at least as per following your logic of calculation for the diametric magnet case from Itsu's 4 magnet case when you say Itsu's RPM of 9,000 is equal to 18,000 RPM for the diametric magnet case)
This all means that your tachometer readings on the reflective tape attached to your spinner needs rechecking or you calculations needs checking?

It is okay that we all make mistakes,  however you again attributed to me a thing what Itsu did: it was Itsu who was raising his rotor speed to 206 Hz in his video, I just referred to it as the maximum speed occuring in his video, and I meant it to prove that your forever mentioned 18,000 RPM was not even approached in his video: still you wrote that he lowered the rotor speed to 18,000 RPM... lowered from what speed then??  (You wrote it in your Reply #691)

Gyula

Look, you're the one who is obviously confused if you're changing your mind now and maintaining that Itsu's running at 2250 RPM and quoting me as wrong, when you stated that his RPM was 9,000! Make up your mind!

Here's the quote from you to refresh your memory:

"In his parallel resonance video, Itsu mentioned his gen coil has 27mH inductance and the tuning capacitor was 40uF, giving 150Hz resonance by the calculation. When he run the motor with the capacitor connected, the scope measured about 146Hz, now if you multiply this by 60, you get 8,760 RPM. If it had measured 150Hz ouput frequency from the generator coil still tuned by the 40uF, then the RPM would have been 9,000 indeed. And when he disconnected the 40uF capacitor, the rotor speeded up to a higher rpm, surely above 9,000 rpm".

• Hero Member
• Posts: 1842
##### Re: Tesla's "COIL FOR ELECTRO-MAGNETS".
« Reply #711 on: January 19, 2014, 06:21:00 PM »
I did some more measurements with the big bedini bifilar coil (see my post http://www.overunity.com/13460/teslas-coil-for-electro-magnets/msg383363/#msg383363, on the photo note the four turn exciter coil with white wire and the capacitors for LC circuit resonance tests).

Today all measurements succeeded (also with the wires separated or in parallel):

- self resonance, wires in series, air core 4600 Hz
- self resonance wires separated or in parallel, air core 58 KHz

- self resonance, wires in series, steel core 4000 Hz
- self resonance wires separated or in parallel, steel core 56 KHz

As MileHigh said, the self capacitance of the coil drops if only one wire is used or if the wires are used in parallel (from around 5 nF to around 600 pF).

The inductance of the coil with wires in series is about 4 times the inductance of the coil with only one wire or the wires in parallel.

The resonance frequency of the coil with only one wire or the wires in parallel in an LC circuit (with 10 µF, 1 µF and 0.22 µ F cap) is about 2 times the resonance frequency of the coil with the wires in series.

Last Thursday I must have had a bad evening because the measurements of the coil using only one wire or the wires in series did not work, but today everything went as it should. Measurements were done with a four turn exciter coil.

Attached is a PDF-file with all measurements of the coil if you are interested.

Tomorrow I will finish the "12 V DC motor magnet spinner" and then the "speed up under load" tests can begin.

#### synchro1

• Hero Member
• Posts: 4720
##### Re: Tesla's "COIL FOR ELECTRO-MAGNETS".
« Reply #712 on: January 19, 2014, 06:31:54 PM »
Here's a picture of Ed's rotor wheel and PMH; Apparently Ed made refrences in his book on Magnetricity to the use of the PMH as a driver coil for this 24 iron blade rotor:

• Hero Member
• Posts: 1842
##### Re: Tesla's "COIL FOR ELECTRO-MAGNETS".
« Reply #713 on: January 19, 2014, 07:05:37 PM »
I did the "pan cake coil on a steel plate and aluminium plate" test.

Both the bifilar and the monofilar pan cake coil show the same increase of inductance when put on a mild steel plate (34 µH increases to 50 µH).

Both coils do not show an increase of inductance when put on a aluminium plate.

As I recall, someone expected some magic when doing this test? Unfortunately there is no magic. But of course, I for sure did something wrong.

#### MileHigh

• Hero Member
• Posts: 7600
##### Re: Tesla's "COIL FOR ELECTRO-MAGNETS".
« Reply #714 on: January 19, 2014, 08:45:25 PM »

I hit the motherload for you and for other experimenters interested in measuring inductance and capacitance, and stuff like that.  You know how it is always wise to double-check your measurements when you do experiments, especially if you believe that you have out of the ordinary results.

I have only watched one clip from this gentleman so far.  I can tell you already that he is the real thing - the real real thing.  I can qualify people quite well and his first clip is amazing in its content and delivery and quality.  As far as his build quality goes and his use of his equipment goes, he is grade A-1 amazing.

The school of thought says one should go back to the basics and master them to give yourself a good foundation.  What did people do before they had inductance meters and capacitance meters and optical tachometers?  They used their scope.  In this clip he shows you two simple tests, one a capacitance measurement, and the other a very nice and clean variation on measuring inductance (or capacitance) using an LC resonator.  It's "cleaner" in the sense that you let the LC resonator resonate itself, and then measure the resonant frequency, as opposed to pumping a frequency into the LC circuit to measure its response.

You notice that he has a special high-current-output driver.  It's a very nice touch but you can still do the tests without the special output driver.  Note however, how easy the driver would be to build using the same materials.

This guy is AMAZING and I am going to check out some of his other clips.  If they are as good as I suspect and the stuff he does is relevant or at least related to this discussion I will post a few more links.

MileHigh

#### MileHigh

• Hero Member
• Posts: 7600
##### Re: Tesla's "COIL FOR ELECTRO-MAGNETS".
« Reply #715 on: January 19, 2014, 09:04:33 PM »
Another mind-blowing clip, capacitor self-resonance measurement:

#### MileHigh

• Hero Member
• Posts: 7600
##### Re: Tesla's "COIL FOR ELECTRO-MAGNETS".
« Reply #716 on: January 19, 2014, 09:30:46 PM »

• Hero Member
• Posts: 1842
##### Re: Tesla's "COIL FOR ELECTRO-MAGNETS".
« Reply #717 on: January 19, 2014, 09:31:55 PM »
Another mind-blowing clip, capacitor self-resonance measurement:

@MileHigh: Thank you for the link to these nice and instructive videos. The next time I order some components I will also get a few 74AC14 Schmitt Triggers, they are not expensive:

http://at.farnell.com/texas-instruments/sn74ac14n/inverter-schmitt-trigger/dp/1470853

#### synchro1

• Hero Member
• Posts: 4720
##### Re: Tesla's "COIL FOR ELECTRO-MAGNETS".
« Reply #718 on: January 19, 2014, 10:03:36 PM »
I did the "pan cake coil on a steel plate and aluminium plate" test.

Both the bifilar and the monofilar pan cake coil show the same increase of inductance when put on a mild steel plate (34 µH increases to 50 µH).

Both coils do not show an increase of inductance when put on a aluminium plate.

As I recall, someone expected some magic when doing this test? Unfortunately there is no magic. But of course, I for sure did something wrong.