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

Plug Heater

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: 83029
  • *Latest: rodmin76

  • *Total Posts: 503087
  • *Total Topics: 15036
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 1
  • *Guests: 12
  • *Total: 13

Author Topic: Bifilar pancake coil overunity experiment  (Read 9772 times)

Offline ayeaye

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 503
Re: Bifilar pancake coil overunity experiment
« Reply #30 on: September 18, 2018, 08:07:59 PM »
I now used Inkscape to draw oscilloscope screen images. I found that Inkscape is the best for the purpose, as accuracy is the most important with things like that. The graphs drawn with Inkscape are on the figure 2 below.

To draw using that method, create a new Inkscape drawing, remove the page border, create grid with 10 pixels each square and 10 squares a big square, this will correspond to one oscilloscope scale. Select snap always. It doesn't matter where you draw, because zooming to the drawing will always zoom in all your drawing. Zoom so that the small squares inside the big squares will become visible, but not more,

Import the oscilloscope screen picture. This screen picture has to have all the grid squares equal and grid lines completely horizontal and vertical, if necessary, prepare it before with gimp or such. Make the picture 50% transparent and move and zoom it so that the oscilloscope grid lines match exactly the Inkscape grid lines. Then on the picture draw the traces with path tool, with straight line segments. Draw the R3 traces first and the R2 (channel 2) traces after that below them, both have to start from the same x. Then draw the x axis for both traces. When the traces are drawn, delete the screen picture. Save it as an ordinary svg file. The following is the svg file that i created.

https://justpaste.it/568vy

The Python script above that has been mentioned here, is the following, so that it would be clear.

PS I found a new trouble, when copying code from here, start copying from the first letter of the code. Otherwise there would be spaces before each statement, and indentation matters a lot for Python, make sure that there are no additional spaces before each statement.

Quote
import sys
 
#Time for gschem unit in ns
XU = 5.0
#Voltage for unit for ch 1 and 2 in mV
YU1 = 0.5
YU2 = 5.0
#Resistors 2 and 3 resistances in ohms
R2 = 983.0
R3 = 99.4
#Frequency in Hz
F = 30303.0

def getlist(list, x0, y0, invert):
    for i in range(len(list)):
        list[ i ][0] -= x0
        list[ i ][2] -= x0
        if (invert):
            list[ i ][1] = y0 - list[ i ][1]
            list[ i ][3] = y0 - list[ i ][3]
        else:
            list[ i ][1] -= y0
            list[ i ][3] -= y0
    return list
 
def gety(list, i, t):
    lx = float(list[ i ][2] - list[ i ][0])
    ly = float(list[ i ][3] - list[ i ][1])
    dx = float(t - list[ i ][0])
    dy = ly * abs(dx / lx)
    return list[ i ][1] + dy
 
def output(s, e):
    #Energy in uJ
    e *= XU / 10 / 1000000
    print("%s power was %.3f uW" % (s, F * e))
 
lines = []
for s in sys.stdin:
    l = []
    i1 = 1
    if (s[0] != "L"): continue
    for j in range(4):
        i0 = i1 + 1
        i1 = s.find(" ", i0)
        l.append(int(s[i0:i1]))
    lines.append(l)

x0 = lines[0][0]
y0 = lines[-2][1]
y1 = lines[-1][1]
lines.pop()
lines.pop()
i1 = map(lambda l: l[1] <= y0, lines).index(True)
i2 = map(lambda l: l[0] == x0, lines[1 : ]).index(True) + 1
ilist = getlist(lines[: i1], x0, y0, False)
olist = getlist(lines[i1 : i2], lines[i1][0], y0, True)
r2list = getlist(lines[i2 : ], lines[i2][0], y1, False)

e = 0.0
i1 = i2 = 0
for t in range(0, ilist[-1][2], 10):
    if (t >= ilist[i1][2]): i1 += 1;
    if (t >= r2list[i2][2]): i2 += 1;
    ilr = gety(r2list, i2, t) * YU2 / R2
    vlr = gety(ilist, i1, t) * YU1
    plr = ilr * vlr / 1000
    pr = vlr * vlr / R3 / 1000
    pl = plr - pr
    e += pl
output("Input", e)

e = 0.0
i1 = 0
for t in range(0, olist[-1][2], 10):
    if (t >= olist[i1][2]): i1 += 1;
    vlr = gety(olist, i1, t) * YU1
    pr = vlr * vlr / R3 / 1000
    e += pr
output("Output", e)

I wrote the following Python script to get the traces data from the Inkscape svg file, which is in the form that it can be used as input for the Python script above. Outputting that data enables to check whether the data was extracted correctly. Whether it always works, i cannot know, it is Inkscape and i cannot know what it always does.

Quote
import sys

def next(s, str, list):
    global i1
    i0 = i1 + 1
    i1 = s.find(str, i0)
    if (i1 == -1): i1 = len(s)
    list.append(int(float(s[i0:i1])))
    return i1 == len(s)

i1 = 0
lines = []
for s in sys.stdin:
    l = []
    i1 = s.find("d=\"m ")
    if (i1 == -1): continue
    i1 = s.find(" ", i1)
    ends = s.find("\"", i1)
    s = s[i1 : ends]
    i1 = 0
    next(s, ",", l)
    next(s, " ", l)
    l[0] = 5000 + l[0]
    l[1] = 5000 - l[1]
    lines.append([l[0], l[1], 0, 0])
    while (True):
        l = []
        next(s, ",", l)
        done = next(s, " ", l)
        l[0] = lines[-1][0] + l[0]
        l[1] = lines[-1][1] - l[1]
        lines[-1][2] = l[0]
        lines[-1][3] = l[1]
        if (done): break
        lines.append([l[0], l[1], 0, 0])
x0 = lines[-1][0]
y0 = lines[-1][1]
for i in range(len(lines)):
    lines[ i ][0] -= x0
    lines[ i ][2] -= x0
    lines[ i ][1] -= y0
    lines[ i ][3] -= y0
    for j in range(4): lines[ i ][ j ] *= 10
for l in lines:
    print("L %d %d %d %d *" % (l[0], l[1], l[2], l[3]))

The output of that Python script having the svg file above as the input, was the following.

Quote
L 400 6700 1200 5800 *
L 1200 5800 2000 5300 *
L 2000 3300 2700 4200 *
L 2700 4200 3300 4600 *
L 3300 4600 4100 4800 *
L 4100 4800 5300 4900 *
L 5300 4900 7400 5000 *
L 400 1900 1400 2100 *
L 1400 2100 2000 2100 *
L 0 5000 7900 5000 *
L 0 0 7900 0 *

The output of the Python script written first in this post, was the following.

Quote
Input power was 5.183 uW
Output power was 5.675 uW

The accuracy of the results can be calculated, by drawing the oscilloscope screen so that it will produce the worst possible result that may still correspond to the oscilloscope screen, and see whether the output is still greater than the input. I estimated that the resistor R2 may be 100 ohms instead of 1k, this will enable even more precise measurements.


Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Bifilar pancake coil overunity experiment
« Reply #30 on: September 18, 2018, 08:07:59 PM »

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13820
Re: Bifilar pancake coil overunity experiment
« Reply #31 on: September 18, 2018, 09:51:28 PM »
Well. You've gone through extraordinary lengths to demonstrate that your oscilloscope traces are slightly biased. You have approximately half a microwatt excess in an approximately 5 microwatt power range. So we are talking about a ten percent discrepancy, roughly. Right?

But you are ultimately basing your measurements on the analog oscilloscope screen. I've done similar things myself, having been in this business for a while now. There are many pitfalls that can happen well before the stage of digitizing the screen traces by whatever method. For example... the kind of difference you are seeing in your  analog scope traces can be caused by a simple out-of-calibration DC bias problem, something so subtle that an entire factory calibration of the scope may even miss it. The scope is +not+ a precision voltmeter and this is true even for DSOs. Scopes are far more accurate in the time domain than they are in the voltage domain. You might want to look up your scope's original factory specifications as to accuracy in the voltage domain at various frequencies.

Furthermore, obtaining accurate current measurements in a pulsed circuit, by whatever means but especially using a scope, has its own can of worms, a big one.

When I first saw your most recent post I almost responded.... "It's too bad you can't run a light bulb on an oscilloscope trace..." but I decided to give you a more comprehensive criticism since you obviously are approaching this with some effort of your own. I can't fault your programming, that's not my field, but I can tell you that there is a whole lot of work to be done _before_ the programming can yield valid results. GIGO applies here... perfectly processed garbage is still garbage, even if it smells sweeter.
There is more but this is sufficient for now. Carry on and good luck.

Offline ayeaye

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 503
Re: Bifilar pancake coil overunity experiment
« Reply #32 on: September 18, 2018, 10:20:16 PM »
I thought you are all about accuracy, but accuracy can be estimated. I conclude that this is a precise enough method, when done carefully enough. I don't exclude that my results are caused by inaccuracy, this is the first time i did it and didn't know it well yet. I said it needs replication before anything can be concluded. Mostly though i provided a method to measure overunity in various coils for these who have analog oscilloscopes or other oscilloscopes that have no digital output. And for these with digital oscilloscopes as well, as with a slight modification this Python script can be used to calculate from the waveform data downloaded from a digital oscilloscope. I couldn't write a script especially for that purpose, as there are many digital oscilloscopes and their waveform data is in different forms, even when generally similar. And to show that, i needed an exact example which my experiment is.

I can't fault your programming, that's not my field

So then how can you decide?

Can you read this

Quote
plr = ilr * vlr / 1000
pr = vlr * vlr / R3 / 1000
pl = plr - pr
e += pl

and this

Quote
pr = vlr * vlr / R3 / 1000
e += pr

does it say something to you?


Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Bifilar pancake coil overunity experiment
« Reply #32 on: September 18, 2018, 10:20:16 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13820
Re: Bifilar pancake coil overunity experiment
« Reply #33 on: September 19, 2018, 10:39:07 AM »
Yes, it says that you have totally missed the points of my post.
Suppose you needed to know how wide a board is needed for a repair on your house, so you send your brother to measure the gap.
And he comes back and says it's three rubber band lengths wide. And he even shows you the rubber band.

Do you start sawing?

Please state the make and model of the analog oscilloscope you used to generate your _raw data_. Please provide the accuracy tolerance specifications of the scope from its user or service manual. Please provide some evidence that the scope is actually in calibration and that its readings can be trusted. Please demonstrate that your camera setup didn't introduce any artifacts due to parallax or insensitivity to dim peaks. Please demonstrate that your probing technique itself didn't introduce artifacts in your measurements.

I could go on like this for a while yet, just as you go on and on about your programming. But what's the point? If you want to see some high COP measurements from a bifilar coil setup, look at this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MNzbc-N-e9c



Offline ayeaye

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 503
Re: Bifilar pancake coil overunity experiment
« Reply #34 on: September 19, 2018, 01:44:30 PM »
If you want to know, my oscilloscope is Hitachi Denshi V-222, it has been calibrated by all requirements of the manual and has the precision that corresponds to all requirements. Like the calibration requires that the trace is within +/- 0.05 division. By these measurements the precision is most likely not worse than +/- 0.5%. What concerns the official precision, it's +/- 3% for both the time and y by the specification. What concerns that though, one should know that the official precision of all the common measuring instruments is all very low, the manufacturers don't want to have responsibility for wrong measurements, so they write the official precision low to protect themselves against all the occasions. And also in order to sell more expensive equipment, who would buy an expensive instrument when a cheaper one does the job. Like i think most who did some work know that one can practically consider the readings of a digital multimeter correct, but their official precision is so low that by that they cannot be used for measurements at all. Precision can be measured, that written by the manufacturer is not yet everything.

The precision written by the manufacturer, what is that? It is when you do the measurements in the desert in a hot sun and you drive there on a bumpy road, and it still has to have that precision.

I think at least for the way i did the measurements and calculations, provided that the scope is calibrated properly, all that one should consider is the precision of taking and processing the measurements, the actual imprecision of the oscilloscope is minor compared to that, and can be not considered.

What concerns the precision, there are also two kind of precisions. One is absolute precision, that is how it measures the exact value of voltage, etc. The other is linear precision, that is how well are the measurements in proportion with the actual values. Linear precision is always much higher than the absolute precision, and what is relevant for overunity is linear precision. Like what i learned in the university was Automatic Control, and i remember some worked on the project of a regulator for an integrated circuits diffusion furnace. The requirement was that the requlator had to keep the temperature of the furnace within 1 degree celsius (kelvin). This was impossible, practically impossible, theoretically impossible. Provided that it had to keep absolute temperature. But it appeared that the range of temperatures was actually much wider, it just had to keep that temperature within 1 degree and it didn't so much matter what temperature it was, and this made it possible.

I could go on like this for a while yet, just as you go on and on about your programming. But what's the point? If you want to see some high COP measurements from a bifilar coil setup, look at this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MNzbc-N-e9c

I think when there is overunity in the coil, then my method will show that.

A wonderful video by you BTW. But the thing i cannot quite figure there, you have one end of the input coil not connected as i understand. Now you have no closed circuit with wires through the output coil of the input transformer, that is, there is nowhere to really measure the current going through it, and thus the input power. The open connection can be connected through the air anywhere, and the current going through it in that way, cannot really be measured. I don't understand why yet another method that doesn't really measure overunity, while the method that i proposed does it more simply, straight-forwardly, and in principle correctly.

« Last Edit: September 19, 2018, 04:03:17 PM by ayeaye »

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Bifilar pancake coil overunity experiment
« Reply #34 on: September 19, 2018, 01:44:30 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline partzman

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 211
Re: Bifilar pancake coil overunity experiment
« Reply #35 on: September 19, 2018, 04:47:30 PM »

[snip

A wonderful video by you BTW. But the thing i cannot quite figure there, you have one end of the input coil not connected as i understand. Now you have no closed circuit with wires through the output coil of the input transformer, that is, there is nowhere to really measure the current going through it, and thus the input power. The open connection can be connected through the air anywhere, and the current going through it in that way, cannot really be measured. I don't understand why yet another method that doesn't really measure overunity, while the method that i proposed does it more simply, straight-forwardly, and in principle correctly.

I think an explanation is in order regarding tightly coupled but isolated windings or coils.  There is a conducting path for the primary current (although it may not be obvious) and that is the distributed capacitance between the windings.  The pancake coils that TK demonstrated are physically wound and placed in proximity to one another such that the capacitance between the windings is probably in the area of several hundred picofarad.  This is considerable at his operating frequency of 1.4MHz and basically forms a series resonance circuit with the coil's inductance. 

Therefore, due to KCL, the current entering the circuit at the primary input with the open end is conducting thru the distributed capacitance to the secondary and can be measured accurately at the output thru the current sensing resistor.

As a side note, this type of circuit is a reactive power to real power converter and they are highly subject to potential measurement errors which is another subject altogether.

Regards,
Pm 

Offline ayeaye

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 503
Re: Bifilar pancake coil overunity experiment
« Reply #36 on: September 19, 2018, 05:06:24 PM »
Therefore, due to KCL, the current entering the circuit at the primary input with the open end is conducting thru the distributed capacitance to the secondary and can be measured accurately at the output thru the current sensing resistor.

Yes yes, and the output is measured accurately on the resistor. But this doesn't address the question how can the input current be measured, that is all input current that goes through the output coil of the input power transformer.


Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Bifilar pancake coil overunity experiment
« Reply #36 on: September 19, 2018, 05:06:24 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline partzman

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 211
Re: Bifilar pancake coil overunity experiment
« Reply #37 on: September 19, 2018, 05:38:50 PM »
Yes yes, and the output is measured accurately on the resistor. But this doesn't address the question how can the input current be measured, that is all input current that goes through the output coil of the input power transformer.

There are only two paths the input current can follow in this circuit.  One is from the secondary of the input transformer and the wiring to all other surrounding grounded objects through the air and two, through the distributed capacitance of the coupled pancake coils.  The distributed capacitance will be much greater than the parasitic capacitance to ground in most cases so one can be reasonably assured that the output current accurately represents the input current.   This can be demonstrated by comparing a calibrated current probe measurement of the input current to the current measured across the current sense resistor.   Any error is small and is not the major problem with these types of circuits.  The major measurement error comes from the fact that the reactive power level can be magnitudes greater than the measured input power which places a real burden on the accuracy of the phase between input voltage and current which then greatly affects the power input measurements.  This is so critical that you are now in the area of comparing probe de-skews, channel and probe offsets, probe capacitance and accuracy, and this would apply for analog or digital.

Regards,
Pm

Offline ayeaye

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 503
Re: Bifilar pancake coil overunity experiment
« Reply #38 on: September 19, 2018, 05:52:28 PM »
There are only two paths the input current can follow in this circuit.

Yes whatever, but he measured only one path.

I don't know, i proposed something simple, simple circuit, moderate frequencies. But they say forget it and take this instead, megahertz frequency, everything flowing through the air, difficult to catch a thing. This may be a wonderful circuit and everything, all in its own way, though i don't know what really use it for. I don't say it's not a wonderful circuit and it may be all interesting, i just say that i don't think it's a good substitute, and i don't think that it's good for measuring overunity.

Do they think that my simple Python scripts are so overwhelmingly complicated, and it is much simpler when getting the waveform data directly from the oscilloscope. Learn some Python, very good to know for electronics too.


Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Bifilar pancake coil overunity experiment
« Reply #38 on: September 19, 2018, 05:52:28 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline ayeaye

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 503
Re: Bifilar pancake coil overunity experiment
« Reply #39 on: September 20, 2018, 06:17:32 PM »
How to write graphs back to Inkscape, the svg file can be simple. The following is the svg file above written in a simple format. Such svg file can be easily written by Python, even a sample data can be written like a number of small rectangles. I didn't read any svg documentation, i did it only by experimenting.

Quote
<svg version="1.1"
    xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"
    xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg">
    <path d="m -150,-537.63782 7,10 10,7"
        style="fill:none;stroke:#000000;stroke-width:0.1"/>
    <path d="m -133,-498.63782 4,-8 4,-4 5,-3 5,-2 7,-1 28,-1"
        style="fill:none;stroke:#000000;stroke-width:0.1"/>
    <path d="m -150,-487.63782 4,-1 8,-1 5,0"
        style="fill:none;stroke:#000000;stroke-width:0.1"/>
    <path d="m -133,-489.63782 0,22"
        style="fill:none;stroke:#000000;stroke-width:0.1"/>
    <path d="m -154,-517.63782 78,0"
        style="fill:none;stroke:#000000;stroke-width:0.1"/>
    <path d="m -154,-467.63782 78,0"
        style="fill:none;stroke:#000000;stroke-width:0.1"/>
    <rect width="1" height="1" x="-154" y="-545"/>
    <rect width="1" height="1" x="-154" y="-460"/>
</svg>

I hope that i provided all you may need, feel free to ask if you have questions.


Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13820
Re: Bifilar pancake coil overunity experiment
« Reply #40 on: September 20, 2018, 08:23:20 PM »
No i cannot, i have no induction cooker. Also using light bulbs is an improper way to measure power, it is very difficult to measure their brightness, and in these videos they don't even try to do that. If you did use heating elements instead or such, you could at least measure their temperature, and from that you could calculate power, though whether they are in the air or in the water, what is the temperature of the air or water, whether the wind blows or water moves, all should then be measured and included in the calculation. No matter how convincing something may look, without a proper measurements the experiments are worthless for research. I mean what you do may be great, all i'm saying is that you lack the necessary rigor.


Could you please explain how the measurements you took on your circuit represent "input power" and "output power" ? Your oscilloscope measures voltages. How do you get from voltages to power values? 

(I know how this is done, normally; I am asking you to explain precisely how you have done it in this case with this circuit as you showed, in plain English not multiple lines of code. As someone who obviously has some programming experience surely you know that one of the worst tasks a programmer can be faced with is debugging _someone else's_ uncommented code.)


This is the circuit you are using, right? Just for review purposes, what's the frequency and duty cycle of the 555 pulse train? Do you think a different signal generator would work the same here? And are you specifying the 2sc945 transistor as necessary or can other NPNs be used? I have a handful of 945s on hand but it's always nice to test alternatives. I'm also concerned about your "bifilar" coil of coaxial headphone cable. It's not really equivalent to the bifilar winding of Tesla's patent. If I were to construct and examine this circuit, I would have to construct a coil like yours, as all of my bifilar coils are true Tesla bifilars (a rarity). Fortunately I have some RG174/U laying around. Do you think that would make a suitable coil for this setup? Or would the true TBF be better? Regardless, if the claim is that there is something special about the particular coil that allows the measurements to result in OU... then other coil types should be compared to see if that is in fact the case.




Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Bifilar pancake coil overunity experiment
« Reply #40 on: September 20, 2018, 08:23:20 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline ayeaye

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 503
Re: Bifilar pancake coil overunity experiment
« Reply #41 on: September 20, 2018, 09:33:07 PM »
Could you please explain how the measurements you took on your circuit represent "input power" and "output power" ? Your oscilloscope measures voltages. How do you get from voltages to power values?

In a pulsed circuit, each cycle has two parts, when the pulse is on and when the pulse is off. The coil and the resistor R3 there form an LR circuit. When the pulse is on, the transistor is open, and the current from the power source goes through that circuit. This is the input part, because the current from the outside power source goes through the coil and is consumed by the coil. When the pulse is off, the transistor is closed, and almost no current goes through R2.

(A very small current that goes through there (during the pulse off) goes to the opposite direction to the current through R3, that decreases it, so not considering that decreases the calculated power in R3, thus it can be disregarded and considered that no current goes through R2 during that part.)

Thus all the current that goes through the R3 in that part (pulse off) is the back-emf generated by the coil, that comes from no outside source. This is the output part. The power during the first part is the power used by the coil, and the power during the second part is the power generated by the coil, this is how the input and output powers are calculated.

Calculating the power used by the coil during the first part (the input power), is done by calculating the power used during the first part in the LR circuit, that is the current going through the R2, multiplied by the voltage on the LR circuit (on the R3), that is Ir2 * Vlr (Ir2 is Vr2 / R2). And then subtracting from that the power used during that part by R3, which is Vlr * Vlr / R3. Thus, all the equation is Vlr * Vr2 / R2 - Vlr * Vlr / R3. This was calculated by the Python script. I don't see how that calculation can be made without a Python or other code, but i don't know all the software that there may be for such calculations.

Calculating the power used by R3 during the second part (the output power) is easy. It's Vlr * Vlr / R3.

The circuit is that yes. Later (after the experiment) i thought that the circuit on the figure below would be better, which is the same with the R2 resistance reduced to 100 ohms. I estimated that a larger resistor there is not necessary, no damage will be caused to the transistor with R2 100 ohms. Having that resistor smaller enables more precise measurements, as the only thing that changes more in its voltage, is the upper part of the trace.

The frequency was 30.303 kHz. The 555 timer doesn't show the duty cycle, so it can only be seen from the oscilloscope traces and the graphs. As it's seen, the duty cycle was close to 22%. I found Arduino to be better, and i think that any signal generator would do, but i used 555 because it's cheap and more people can use it. I chose the c945 transistor because it's fast, but i think that any fast small NPN transistor would do.

I used coaxial cable in the coil, because i think that the coaxial cable has more capacitance than a pair of wires, as the other conductor is all around the first, and thus the area between the conductors is greater. So if there is no headphones cable (which i found that they in some places sell under the name "audio cable"), then it may be made of a coaxial cable. At that, my cable had a pair of coaxial cables, so i made of these the equivalent of two bifilar pancake coils, one on another, that i connected in series. The coil had 17 turns, two in series had the equivalent of 34 turns.

I think that all that matters is that it's a bifilar coil, with as great as possible capacitance, because i guess that it's this capacitance that may cause overunity. Thus it can be other coils, like bifilar pancake coils, the ones with more turns and more capacitance would be better i think, all i had was this headphones cable and i couldn't make a bigger coil. Also it can be other bifilar coil, such as a Rodin interference coil, that have considerable capacitance between the two bifilar windings. Maybe even a Bedini SG bifilar coil, but without the core, as i noticed that the coil having any core makes the back-emf narrower and seems to decrease the effect.

I think also that the possible overunity effect is greater when the frequency is closer to the resonant frequency. Because when the effect is caused by capacitance, then it depends on the self-oscillation ringing, which is relatively greater, the closer its frequency is to the duty cycle. I may be wrong in that, it's just what i thought. With my 555 timer i couldn't go over 30 kHz with the 20% duty cycle. What concerns the duty cycle, i think that it should be great enough for all duration of the back-emf, as cutting the back-emf i think is not good.

As i have only a small coil, i noticed that its self-oscillation frequency was somewhere near 1MHz, which is very high, i think a bigger coil with a lower self-oscillation frequency may be better.

« Last Edit: September 20, 2018, 11:38:43 PM by ayeaye »

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13820
Re: Bifilar pancake coil overunity experiment
« Reply #42 on: September 21, 2018, 03:39:51 AM »
I've redrawn the circuit to aid in laying it out. Please check my redraw and let me know if I've made any errors.



Offline ayeaye

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 503
Re: Bifilar pancake coil overunity experiment
« Reply #43 on: September 21, 2018, 04:31:45 AM »
I've redrawn the circuit to aid in laying it out. Please check my redraw and let me know if I've made any errors.

Yes that's correct.

I made R2 1k because i was afraid of possible high peaks from the coil, but there appeared to be none, so it can be made smaller.

The pinout of the c945 that i have was not as written on the datasheet, i found that out by testing. There apparently are these with two different pinouts. I don't know what is yours, mine was as on the figure below, that is, emitter is where the blue jumper wire goes, collector is where the brown wire goes, and base is in the middle.


Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13820
Re: Bifilar pancake coil overunity experiment
« Reply #44 on: September 21, 2018, 05:41:50 AM »
EBC is more usual for the TO-92 package, that is true. I haven't tested my handful yet. I think I have some from 2 different manufacturers.

I was going by this datasheet:

 

OneLink