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

User Menu

Custom Search

Author Topic: really stupid question.  (Read 11417 times)

carlprad

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 45
Re: really stupid question.
« Reply #15 on: September 25, 2013, 11:31:20 PM »
k, thanks so much.


gyulasun

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4117
Re: really stupid question.
« Reply #16 on: September 25, 2013, 11:34:14 PM »

Finally, how do I figure out the right number of windings.


Here is a link to a freely downloadable software to calculate the number of turns, even for an unknown toroidal core.  There other online calculators if you search for it like  "toroid coil  calculator". 

Edit: added the link: http://www.dl5swb.de/html/mini_ring_core_calculator.htm

carlprad

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 45
Re: really stupid question.
« Reply #17 on: September 25, 2013, 11:37:22 PM »
Gyula

I looked at the Naudin page you posted.

Did you ever try his experiment?


gyulasun

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4117
Re: really stupid question.
« Reply #18 on: September 25, 2013, 11:45:10 PM »
I tested only the Motionless Electromagnetic generator i.e. MEG but never got any extra output higher than the input (I had about 87% efficiency).  Naudin used non-linear (carbon based) resistors to load the outputs in the later MEG versions which made no sense whatsoever.

No I have not built the project in the link I posted to his site. 

carlprad

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 45
Re: really stupid question.
« Reply #19 on: September 25, 2013, 11:49:30 PM »
Gyula

I am new to all this and am basically just having some fun learning about all the incredible experiments you are all conducting.

When you say that Naudin used carbon based resistors in the "later MEG", do you mean the 2SGen, or some other MEG?

Thanks
 

carlprad

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 45
Re: really stupid question.
« Reply #20 on: September 25, 2013, 11:53:05 PM »
Gyula

can you also repost the link to the toroid calculator, I could not find it.

Thanks




gyulasun

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4117
Re: really stupid question.
« Reply #21 on: September 25, 2013, 11:59:08 PM »
I mean that till MEG version 2.1 he used correct, non inductive resistors see the first half of this link: http://jnaudin.free.fr/meg/megv21.htm

but later on when he referred to his MEG version 3 (in the bottom half of the link) he used a "conditioned" 100 kOhm carbon resistor which has a non-linear property of changing its resistance as the voltage changes across it...  or he suggested using a MOV as the load which is also a nonlinear (metal-oxid varistor) component...

gyulasun

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4117
Re: really stupid question.
« Reply #22 on: September 26, 2013, 12:00:50 AM »
Gyula

can you also repost the link to the toroid calculator, I could not find it.

Thanks

yes I inserted now also above, sorry  http://www.dl5swb.de/html/mini_ring_core_calculator.htm

carlprad

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 45
Re: really stupid question.
« Reply #23 on: September 26, 2013, 12:01:18 AM »
oh, I see.

You are not referring to the 2SGen then?

By the way, can you give me the link tot he toroid calculator?

Thanks


carlprad

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 45
Re: really stupid question.
« Reply #24 on: September 26, 2013, 12:02:07 AM »
got the link, sorry!

the_big_m_in_ok

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2087
Re: really stupid question.
« Reply #25 on: September 26, 2013, 04:27:59 AM »
Hi Lee,

Jean L Naudin has been using fractions for wire diameters for decades now. See here for instance:
http://jnaudin.free.fr/2SGen/indexen.htm 

Maybe the French use it, Germans and others may be not, it is more common to use 0.5 or  .5  formats.
       @gyulasun
Good to hear from you.
       I did see reference to the wire diameter wording in jnaudin's site above.   Interesting.   Whether or not he's alone in writing wire diameter descriptions that way is open to question.   Others in his country may take exception to his wording if they were really unfamiliar with it.   Those who research both European and American wiring schematics would immediately see significant differences in component identification symbols.   Capacitors are an obvious example to me.
 
--Lee