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.
Amazon Warehouse Deals ! Now even more Deep Discounts ! Check out these great prices on slightly used or just opened once only items.I always buy my gadgets via these great Warehouse deals ! Highly recommended ! Many thanks for supporting OverUnity.com this way.

User Menu

Tesla Paper

Free Energy Book

Get paid

Donations

Please Donate for the Forum.
Many thanks.
Regards, Stefan.(Admin)

A-Ads

Powerbox

Smartbox

3D Solar

3D Solar Panels

DC2DC converter

Micro JouleThief

FireMatch

FireMatch

CCKnife

CCKnife

CCTool

CCTool

Magpi Magazine

Magpi Magazine Free Rasberry Pi Magazine

Battery Recondition

Battery Recondition

Arduino

Ultracaps

YT Subscribe

Gravity Machines

Tesla-Ebook

Magnet Secrets

Lindemann Video

Navigation

Products

Products

WaterMotor kit

Statistics

  • *Total Members: 83955
  • *Latest: serials

  • *Total Posts: 525618
  • *Total Topics: 15645
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 1
  • *Guests: 7
  • *Total: 8

Author Topic: Rotating Magnetic Field's and Inductors.  (Read 118631 times)

Offline tinman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5231
Re: Rotating Magnetic Field's and Inductors.
« Reply #60 on: December 16, 2015, 04:04:53 PM »
Brad:

When your scope shows the average current consumption from the CVR it's basically showing you the area under the current pulse, right?



Holy crap, it's the scope shot of the coil without the rotor in place.



You don't even need to mark up the timing diagrams like I did, it is as plain as day just like I said to you in my first posting - look at the timing diagrams.



MileHigh

Quote
Take a look at the two attached scope shots that I modified, which one has the larger area under the curve?

The scope shot taken without the rotor. But why do you think that is MH-->it's because there was a higher current draw with the rotor removed.

Quote
I simply asked you to assume that I was right as an exercise for yourself, to try to get you to think instead of gobbling up the first thing that comes into your mind, and you flat-out refused.

When some one tells me just to assume they are right,when i see the exact opposite,then i will most certainly refuse. Even Verpies stepped in and said-Quote this is not the scientific method.

Quote
The ironic thing is that you even know this stuff and you even stated it.  You stated that you knew the coil without the rotor in place was burning off energy needlessly because it had hit its V/R limit.  Then in your second clip you trimmed back on the pulse width for the coil + rotor configuration to make it more efficient.  Yet you look at your setup with the rotor spinning and it does not occur to you to trim back on the pulse width for the setup with the coil only because you already have decided that "adding the spinning rotor magnets increases the efficiency."  Your desire to believe blinds you and you refuse to think.

No,no,no MH.
You need to listen more carefully. I said in the video that i trimmed the duty cycle until i got no more P/out,but the P/in still rose-->without the rotor in play. I then dropped the duty cycle down 1%,so as the inductors P/in to P/out ratio was at it optimum.

Quote
The two attached images put both setups on an equal playing field.  Both current pulses have been shaved off so that the current rises approximately three divisions on your scope display.  In the case without the rotor the current rises faster and therefore it tales less energy per pulse to produce approximately the same back spike energy.

No MH,you have that ass about. As the pulse duration is set,that only means more current flows through the CVR if that current risses faster as seen in the trace on the scope.

Quote
In the case with the rotor the current rises slower and therefore it takes more energy per pulse to produce approximately the same back spike energy.

Once again,you have it ass about. Did you not see this in the scopes mean calculations?.

Quote
   The current rises slower in the case with the rotor because the coil has to do more work per pulse because it has to keep the rotor spinning.

No,the current rises slower because the spinning magnets have already started to create a current flow in the inductor before the transistor switches on.

Quote
Just go on your bench and trim the pulse width back and keep the same pulse frequency for the case without the rotor.  You will see that the efficiency in this case will be better than the case with the rotor in place.

As above--this is what i did before the second video MH. The duty cycle was trimmed to obtain maximum efficiency from the coil before the spinning rotor was set in to play.

Quote
You simply refused to analyze this situation properly even though you knew the coil was burning power needlessly in the case without the rotor and even though you knew that trimming the width of the pulse can increase efficiency.  You had all the pieces to the puzzle in your hands but you refused to put them together.  You led yourself down a garden path one more time.

No MH,not this time. I afraid you lead your self down your own garden path,and got lost.
You didnt listen to the video(edit 1.18 to 1.25 in the video in question--with or !without! the rotor in play),and you jumped to conclusions due to your inability to accept change that go's against your beliefs.

Now that you know that you messed it all up,and you know the duty cycle was trimmed so as the coil gained maximum efficiency without the rotor in play,can you now tell us all what it was that increased the efficiency of the DUT--if not the rotating magnets.


Brad

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Rotating Magnetic Field's and Inductors.
« Reply #60 on: December 16, 2015, 04:04:53 PM »

Offline tinman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5231
Re: Rotating Magnetic Field's and Inductors.
« Reply #61 on: December 16, 2015, 04:06:03 PM »
you better be nice to me milehigh otherwise i will tell my mother
in law about you.ok

Please do NOT fill this thread with rubbish seychelles.

A one of request.


Brad

Offline tinman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5231
Re: Rotating Magnetic Field's and Inductors.
« Reply #62 on: December 16, 2015, 04:16:35 PM »

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Rotating Magnetic Field's and Inductors.
« Reply #62 on: December 16, 2015, 04:16:35 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline seychelles

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 696
Re: Rotating Magnetic Field's and Inductors.
« Reply #63 on: December 16, 2015, 04:44:58 PM »
TINMAN for a great improvement of your pulse motor ,
1 Make all the magnets on the rotor N  and then place two ceramic
magnets on the sides of the coil facing facing NORTH to each other..

Offline MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7600
Re: Rotating Magnetic Field's and Inductors.
« Reply #64 on: December 16, 2015, 04:53:52 PM »
Brad:

Quote
No,no,no MH.
You need to listen more carefully. I said in the video that i trimmed the duty cycle until i got no more P/out,but the P/in still rose-->without the rotor in play. I then dropped the duty cycle down 1%,so as the inductors P/in to P/out ratio was at it optimum.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4leXKDz7D8c

Ar 1:11 in your second clip you say, "I've dropped the duty cycle down to 23%" in the configuration with the rotor in place.  I see you made one more clip but I haven't watched that clip.

What I can tell you is this:  Without the rotor in place and by trimming down the pulse with and keeping the pulse frequency the same (although the pulse frequency is not that relevant) then you will get better power-out to power-in performance than any configuration with the rotor in place and spinning.  Without the power drain of the spinning rotor the coil will perform better.  The shorter the energizing pulse, the less final current in the coil, and the less the total i-squared-R losses will be.  That's why DC-to-DC converters use a high frequency pulsing technique - it's to keep the current in the coil to a minimum in order to reduce the useless resistive losses in the wire.

When you compare the case with the spinning rotor to the case with no rotor, the pulse width is simply too wide for the case with no rotor and you are losing efficiency by needlessly burning off power in the coil in the form of resistive losses in the wire - and seeing higher current consumption.  You look at the case with the rotor spinning and see less current consumption are you are deceiving yourself into thinking that the spinning rotor magnets are giving you more efficiency when in fact what is taking place is that the too-long pulse width without the rotor is giving you less efficiency.

You are putting the rotor in place and thinking you are getting more efficiency because of the magnets when what you should be thinking is that you are losing efficiency when there is no rotor in place because of unnecessary resistive losses because of bad pulse timing (and associated higher current consumption) when you remove the rotor.  That is your big failure to see what's really taking place.

You are confusing a decrease in efficiency for case "B" (no rotor) for an increase in efficiency with case "A" (with the rotor).  Adding the spinning rotor is not increasing your efficiency at all, it is decreasing your efficiency.

I can flip it around for you:  You have an optimum power-out to power-in efficiency with just the coil only.  The pulse width is narrow and the resistive losses are minimized.  Then when you add the spinning rotor you are obligated to increase the pulse width to support the added load of the spinning rotor - which will also increase the current consumption.  You will have to put more power into the coil to get about the same amount of power out.  Therefore, adding the spinning rotor reduces the power-out to power-in efficiency.

The above paragraph really describes what is happening in your tests.  A proper measurement without the rotor in place will give you a better power-out to power-in efficiency as compared to any spinning rotor configuration.  You can clearly see it in the timing diagrams.

Look, higher efficiency to the left, poorer efficiency to the right:

Lousy pulse timing:                                           <poor eff. with rotor>        <even worse eff. without rotor>
Good pulse timing:    <good eff. without rotor>   <poor eff. with rotor>

You are looking at the lousy pulse timing and thinking <poor efficiency with the rotor> is "magnet magic" because it's better than <even worse efficiency without the rotor>.  That is dead wrong.

MileHigh

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Rotating Magnetic Field's and Inductors.
« Reply #64 on: December 16, 2015, 04:53:52 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline seychelles

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 696
Re: Rotating Magnetic Field's and Inductors.
« Reply #65 on: December 16, 2015, 05:00:27 PM »
AS SUCH

Offline MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7600
Re: Rotating Magnetic Field's and Inductors.
« Reply #66 on: December 16, 2015, 05:07:26 PM »
Brad:

Me:  Take a look at the two attached scope shots that I modified, which one has the larger area under the curve?

You:  The scope shot taken without the rotor. But why do you think that is MH-->it's because there was a higher current draw with the rotor removed.

You take a look again.  I said modified scope shots.  I added the blue rectangles on the right side of each pulse so that you would only be looking at the dark area under the curve for each pulse.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Rotating Magnetic Field's and Inductors.
« Reply #66 on: December 16, 2015, 05:07:26 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline verpies

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3464
Re: Rotating Magnetic Field's and Inductors.
« Reply #67 on: December 16, 2015, 05:18:56 PM »
Yes Verpies--that is how it is.
...and how are your scope probes connected to this circuit ?

For example:
Ch1 --> point B
G1   --> point C
Ch2 --> GND
G2   --> point C

Offline MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7600
Re: Rotating Magnetic Field's and Inductors.
« Reply #68 on: December 16, 2015, 09:02:42 PM »
Do me a flavor and read post 28,, then get on the correct video that was done to "fix" the error you are hounding on.

When does adding a load reduce the cost?

Yes, I agree.  Look at post #28 (image attached) and you can see exactly the same thing that I am highlighting in my original screen captures.  The average current in the no-rotor case is higher because it rises faster.  You can see it as plain as day so there was no point in doing the work to mark up another set of screen captures.

One more time, you are asking the wrong question.

The question should be, "When does not adding a load increase the cost?"

That is the real question, and if you fail to realize what the real question is and try to answer the wrong question instead then you end up leading yourself down a garden path.  And the con artists know this and the art of deception and deflection is already 3/4 done for them by a willing audience that wants to believe.

Answering the real question properly as has already been done clearly shows that the magnets are doing nothing.  The magnets are just passive dead-as-a-doornail components being pushed around by the coil which is being energized by the battery.

How many times have you seen clips where people add a load and the power consumption goes down?  The answer is that we have all seen it hundreds of times with too many experiments to mention.  You have to work on understanding electronics to explain why instead of just blindly believing that "magnets are magic and they are adding power to the system."

Taking another example, this is just a variation on seeing your source battery voltage increase while you run your experiment and convincing yourself that "power is being returned to the battery" when the circuit doesn't even have a means to return power to the battery.  I remember seeing that in the old days all the time but now people are wiser.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Rotating Magnetic Field's and Inductors.
« Reply #68 on: December 16, 2015, 09:02:42 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline EMJunkie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3316
Re: Rotating Magnetic Field's and Inductors.
« Reply #69 on: December 16, 2015, 09:19:24 PM »
Yes, I agree.  Look at post #28 (image attached) and you can see exactly the same thing that I am highlighting in my original screen captures.  The average current in the no-rotor case is higher because it rises faster.  You can see it as plain as day so there was no point in doing the work to mark up another set of screen captures.

One more time, you are asking the wrong question.

The question should be, "Why does not adding a load increase the cost?"

That is the real question, and if you fail to realize what the real question is and try to answer the wrong question instead then you end up leading yourself down a garden path.  And the con artists know this and the art of deception and deflection is already 3/4 done for them by a willing audience that wants to believe.

This is just a variation on seeing your source battery voltage increase while you run your experiment and convincing yourself that "power is being returned to the battery" when the circuit doesn't even have a means to return power to the battery.  I remember seeing that in the old days all the time but now people are wiser.




OOOOOHHHHHHHhhhhhhh the Drivel....

Why is the Voltage on the yellow Trace got this funny squiggly bit from one to the other Capture, what could this funny squiggly bit be I wonder?????

In 1831 Michael Faraday discovered Induction, MileHigh still has not discovered it!!!!! You driveling old Git!!!!

   Chris Sykes
       hyiq.org


Offline MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7600
Re: Rotating Magnetic Field's and Inductors.
« Reply #70 on: December 16, 2015, 09:29:34 PM »
In 1831 Michael Faraday discovered Induction, MileHigh still has not discovered it!!!!! You driveling old Git!!!!

Will you get over your ridiculous Faraday fetish you twit?  I suppose the explanation for what is happening in Tinman's experiment is over your head since you don't understand how a coil works.  Do you remember when we had the discussion with MarkE?

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Rotating Magnetic Field's and Inductors.
« Reply #70 on: December 16, 2015, 09:29:34 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline EMJunkie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3316
Re: Rotating Magnetic Field's and Inductors.
« Reply #71 on: December 16, 2015, 09:44:59 PM »
Will you get over your ridiculous Faraday fetish you twit?  I suppose the explanation for what is happening in Tinman's experiment is over your head since you don't understand how a coil works.  Do you remember when we had the discussion with MarkE?


Are you Blind and Stupid?

Your ability to CHOOSE Ignorance over Logic and Evidence is just too overwhelming for some people!!!

By the way, Your Computer is POWERED the very same principle's that Michael Faraday gave you 184 Years ago!!! But I know, you CHOOSE to be ignorant of it!

 The PROOF speaks volumes, MileHigh is just a cretin that has no desire to look at facts!

   Chris Sykes
       hyiq.org

P.S: MarkE never dismissed Faraday's Laws of Induction, he was much smarter than that!!!

Offline MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7600
Re: Rotating Magnetic Field's and Inductors.
« Reply #72 on: December 16, 2015, 09:50:47 PM »
How about you just stop making silly gratuitous attacks and instead discuss the subject at hand in the thread?

Offline EMJunkie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3316
Re: Rotating Magnetic Field's and Inductors.
« Reply #73 on: December 16, 2015, 09:57:28 PM »
How about you just stop making silly gratuitous attacks and instead discuss the subject at hand in the thread?


TOPIC: Rotor makes for a HIGHER Efficiency - Proven to be true.

I propose there is enough evidence to say "Faradays Law of Induction" is clearly seen on the Scope Shots Tinman has provided.

You dispute the evidence...

So who is really distracting the masses here? Its you MileHigh.

   Chris Sykes
       hyiq.org

Offline MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7600
Re: Rotating Magnetic Field's and Inductors.
« Reply #74 on: December 16, 2015, 10:31:25 PM »

TOPIC: Rotor makes for a HIGHER Efficiency - Proven to be true.

I propose there is enough evidence to say "Faradays Law of Induction" is clearly seen on the Scope Shots Tinman has provided.

No, the only thing that has been proven is that adding the rotor increased the overall impedance of the coil.  Why is that?  Where is the power going without the rotor vs. with the rotor?  What is transpiring inside the coil when there is no rotor in place vs. when there is a rotor in place?

I have already stated that the coil will be more efficient without a rotor in place.  Brad can prove that for himself if he wants to by doing the test.  The lower the final current in the coil (shorter pulse) before the transistor switches off the more efficient the coil will be.

Please stop the Straw Man argument where you state that I am denying Faraday, it's laughable.

 

OneLink