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

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 Posts: 509024
  • *Total Topics: 15176
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 6
  • *Guests: 13
  • *Total: 19

Author Topic: Bifilar pancake coil overunity experiment  (Read 20186 times)

Offline ayeaye

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 577
Re: Bifilar pancake coil overunity experiment
« Reply #90 on: September 25, 2018, 07:53:36 PM »
I had an error in all previous calculations, i don't know why did i divide by 10. The power calculated in the iteration is in mW, the time is in ns, so when multiplying that by time and dividing it by 1000000 (million) instead of billion, we get energy in uJ, and when multiplying that by frequency in Hz, we get power in uW. This is how it must be and this is how it now is. So all results were evidently 10 times less, but this didn't change the output/input power ratio. The Python calculation script with that error corrected, is now the following.

Quote
import sys

#Time scale in us
XU = 2.0
#Voltage scale in V
YU = 0.225
#Resistors 2 and 3 resistances in ohms
R2 = 987.2
R3 = 99.91
#Voltage of the power supply in V
V = 12.0
#Collector voltage in V
VC = 0.3
#Frequency in kHz
F = 110.001

#Oscilloscope scale is 100 squares, square is 10 units
#In calculations XU and YU are in ns and mV for unit
#Voltages are in mV and frequency is in Hz
V *= 1000
VC *= 1000
F *= 1000
ilist = []
olist = []
e = 0.0
n = 0

def gety(list, n, t):
    lx = float(list[n][2] - list[n][0])
    ly = float(list[n][3] - list[n][1])
    dx = float(t - list[n][0])
    dy = ly * abs(dx / lx)
    return (list[n][1] + dy) * YU

def output(s, e):
    #Energy in uJ
    e *= XU / 1000000
    print("%s power was %.3f uW" % (s, F * e))

for s in sys.stdin:
    l = []
    i1 = 1
    if (s[0] != "I" and s[0] != "O"): continue
    for j in range(4):
        i0 = i1 + 1
        i1 = s.find(" ", i0)
        if (i1 == -1): i1 = len(s)
        l.append(int(s[i0:i1]))
    if (s[0] == "I"): ilist.append(l)
    if (s[0] == "O"): olist.append(l)

for t in range(ilist[-1][2]):
    while (t >= ilist[n][2]): n += 1;
    vlr = gety(ilist, n, t)
    pr = vlr * vlr / R3 / 1000
    ilr = (V - VC - vlr) / R2
    plr = ilr * vlr / 1000
    pl = plr - pr
    e += pl
output("Input", e)

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

The output of that script with the data from the previous coaxial coil test graph, was the following.

Quote
Input power was 173.492 uW
Output power was 79.925 uW

I also got the sample data of the same test directly from the oscilloscope screen image, as i described above. This sample data was the following.

https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/4nQzyT47W5

The following is the Python script that calculates directly from sample data, this can also be used to calculate from the sample data taken from the oscilloscope, provided that the numbers precede by the letter I or O. In that sample data one oscilloscope scale was 50 (which was also 50 pixels on screen), the numbers are relative to the x axis, and the output part is inverted.

Quote
import sys

#Time scale in us
XU = 2.0
#Voltage scale in V
YU = 0.225
#Resistors 2 and 3 resistances in ohms
R2 = 987.2
R3 = 99.91
#Voltage of the power supply in V
V = 12.0
#Collector voltage in V
VC = 0.3
#Frequency in kHz
F = 110.001

#The length of a scale is 50 pixels
#In calculations XU and YU are in ns and mV for unit
#Voltages are in mV and frequency is in Hz
V *= 1000
VC *= 1000
F *= 1000
XU *= 1000 / 50
YU *= 1000 / 50
ilist = []
olist = []
e = 0.0

for s in sys.stdin:
    if (s[0] == "I"): ilist.append(int(s[2 : len(s)]))
    if (s[0] == "O"): olist.append(int(s[2 : len(s)]))

for t in range(len(ilist)):
    vlr = ilist[t] * YU
    pr = vlr * vlr / R3 / 1000
    ilr = (V - VC - vlr) / R2
    plr = ilr * vlr / 1000
    pl = plr - pr
    e += pl
e *= XU / 1000000
print("Input power was %.3f uW" % (F * e))

e = 0.0
for t in range(len(olist)):
    vlr = olist[t] * YU
    pr = vlr * vlr / R3 / 1000
    e += pr
e *= XU / 1000000
print("Output power was %.3f uW" % (F * e))

The output of that Python script with the sample data above, was the following.

Quote
Input power was 209.347 uW
Output power was 111.954 uW

As one can see, this differs a lot from the results above. This shows the great imprecision of the method of extracting values directly from the oscilloscope's screen image.

If this Python script was still too complicated, split it into two as the following, calculating the input and output parts separately. Then you don't need letters before the numbers, just a list of the input part, and the list of the output part. List like this:

7
8
4

Quote
import sys

#Time scale in us
XU = 2.0
#Voltage scale in V
YU = 0.225
#Resistors 2 and 3 resistances in ohms
R2 = 987.2
R3 = 99.91
#Voltage of the power supply in V
V = 12.0
#Collector voltage in V
VC = 0.3
#Frequency in kHz
F = 110.001

#The length of a scale is 50 pixels
#In calculations XU and YU are in ns and mV for unit
#Voltages are in mV and frequency is in Hz
V *= 1000
VC *= 1000
F *= 1000
XU *= 1000 / 50
YU *= 1000 / 50
ilist = []
e = 0.0

for s in sys.stdin: ilist.append(int(s))

for t in range(len(ilist)):
    vlr = ilist[t] * YU
    pr = vlr * vlr / R3 / 1000
    ilr = (V - VC - vlr) / R2
    plr = ilr * vlr / 1000
    pl = plr - pr
    e += pl
e *= XU / 1000000
print("Input power was %.3f uW" % (F * e))

Quote
import sys

#Time scale in us
XU = 2.0
#Voltage scale in V
YU = 0.225
#Resistors 2 and 3 resistances in ohms
R2 = 987.2
R3 = 99.91
#Voltage of the power supply in V
V = 12.0
#Collector voltage in V
VC = 0.3
#Frequency in kHz
F = 110.001

#The length of a scale is 50 pixels
#In calculations XU and YU are in ns and mV for unit
#Voltages are in mV and frequency is in Hz
V *= 1000
VC *= 1000
F *= 1000
XU *= 1000 / 50
YU *= 1000 / 50
olist = []
e = 0.0

for s in sys.stdin: olist.append(int(s))

for t in range(len(olist)):
    vlr = olist[t] * YU
    pr = vlr * vlr / R3 / 1000
    e += pr
e *= XU / 1000000
print("Output power was %.3f uW" % (F * e))

Also if you have no other graphing tools, then with the following you can plot a graph from a list, a point graph or bar graph. Just paste the list to the column A there, and select A as the Y source. Then you can separate the input and output parts.

https://plot.ly/create/#/

« Last Edit: September 25, 2018, 11:43:24 PM by ayeaye »

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Bifilar pancake coil overunity experiment
« Reply #90 on: September 25, 2018, 07:53:36 PM »

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13824
Re: Bifilar pancake coil overunity experiment
« Reply #91 on: September 26, 2018, 01:47:16 AM »
Quote
This shows the great imprecision of the method of extracting values directly from the oscilloscope's screen image.
And transferring an oscilloscope's screen image to a graphing program and then extracting values from that isn't going to improve the precision, either. And as you've found... some bugs don't show up until we've already proclaimed our programs to be without error. How can you be absolutely sure there aren't other bugs or errors?


My next step, in progress, is to make a coaxial bifilar coil more similar to yours. Your next step, if you will allow me to suggest it, is for you to rebuild your circuit and reproduce your scopetraces and re-analyze the new traces. Then we can start looking at common sources of error in analog scoposcopy, like hidden DC bias errors or improperly locating the zero baseline of a trace.
As long as I can't produce OU measurements on my digital scope because maybe my coils aren't good enough, and as long as you can't reanalyze your own coil using a well-constructed circuit and a DSO... I don't know how else to proceed.

Offline FixedSys

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 30
Re: Bifilar pancake coil overunity experiment
« Reply #92 on: September 26, 2018, 01:35:15 PM »
Can this be self looped and drive a joule thief to indicate it's running?

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Bifilar pancake coil overunity experiment
« Reply #92 on: September 26, 2018, 01:35:15 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline ayeaye

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 577
Re: Bifilar pancake coil overunity experiment
« Reply #93 on: September 26, 2018, 03:06:33 PM »
Can this be self looped and drive a joule thief to indicate it's running?

This experiment is only for measuring whether there is overunity in the coil. When there is enough overunity in the coil, then a self looped device likely can be made, but this is not the purpose of this experiment. On the other hand, the effort of making a self looped device is likely worthless when the coil has no overunity.

More generally, this experiment shows the energy efficiency of the coil, it shows overunity when the coil has overunity, or the measure of unity when it doesn't have overunity. Even with no overunity, this experiment may be important for making circuits where coils are used, as it may be important to know their energy efficiency. It also enables to research how different types of coils behave.

When one has a coil, especially when one wants to use it for an overunity device, then likely this experiment should be done first with that coil, to see the energy efficiency of the coil. No matter what one will use that coil for, even when using it in the devices like Bedini motor.

This experiment is for measuring the energy efficiency of all types of coils, including various pancake coils, Rodin coils, starship coils, Abha coils, unification coils, other bifilar coils, any of the large variety of coils there are. Pancake coil was the first i used it for, and i like pancake coils, i also like pancakes, so i like to call the experiment pancake.

This experiment does not include measuring other forms of energy that coils may produce, like static electricity that certain pancake coils may create. Or this can be added to this experiment to measure the whole energy efficiency of the coil.

I will also provide the lists of the input and output parts from the above, like for test calculations. The samples are for each horizontal pixel, they are number of pixels and relative to the x axis, the output part is inverted. Oscilloscope scale on Rigol is 50 pixels. The input list was the following.

https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/Gvj9K4Mf6x

And the output list was the following.

https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/zJpNxZG5QQ

For Python use online compiler, if Python is not installed, select Python there. For spreadsheet use LibreOffice Calc, i hope, at least not Excel ;) When copying code or other data from this forum, select the text, but don't move the mouse pointer out of the quote box, copy when the pointer is in the box, otherwise it will add spaces before each line, that will give error.

https://www.ideone.com

« Last Edit: September 26, 2018, 05:22:05 PM by ayeaye »

Offline F6FLT

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 409
Re: Bifilar pancake coil overunity experiment
« Reply #94 on: September 26, 2018, 04:29:55 PM »
Hi everybody

The current experimentations here and there with bifilar coils made me want to try it too (thanks guys). If anomalous results are observed, which remains to be confirmed, then we may have a theory behind it with nuclear or electronic spin resonance phenomena.  The NMR/ESR is the guiding idea that gets me started in experimentation, that's why I plan to change from conventional wire coils to flat copper tape coils. In spite it will not be an exact duplication of ayeaye's experiment, I would like to inform you that I started today. I failed to do a correct winding, the copper tape is very thin and easily damaged. I just ordered some of these tapes again, like these:
https://www.amazon.com/Double-Sided-Conductive-Shielding-Soldering-Electrical/dp/B074QN1YNH/ref=sr_1_25

These tapes should provide a higher capacity between turns. Although they are very thin, the effective conduction depth due to the skin effect is only 65µm at 1 MHz and 20 µm at 10MHz so we will not lose much of the effective resistance at RF frequencies.
I think another interest is the much better regularity of the electric field between the two tapes because of a constant spacing between conductors unlike wires of round cross-section.
The thinness of the tapes is also an advantage if nuclear or electronic spin resonance phenomena are involved, as there will be less dispersion of the magnetic field in the conductor bulk.
I hope for my first results next week (positive or negative!).


Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Bifilar pancake coil overunity experiment
« Reply #94 on: September 26, 2018, 04:29:55 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline ayeaye

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 577
Re: Bifilar pancake coil overunity experiment
« Reply #95 on: September 26, 2018, 06:47:36 PM »
Ok, i now did the calculation of the input and output parts with an online spreadsheet too, and the results were almost the same, see below. The input spreadsheet is the following.

https://lite.framacalc.org/hRrVK9eHf3

And the output spreadsheet is the following.

https://lite.framacalc.org/kb0Fxd8dCi

Start a new spreadsheet on the following, click on "Create a calc".

https://accueil.framacalc.org/en

In a spreadsheet, all is much less clear and less organized. One should use B, C instead of the names of the variables. One cannot use constants or common variables, or these will again be something like F16, which only makes it more confusing. So i used the values of the constants.

I can shortly explain how to use it, if that may be any problem. Click on the first shell, then paste the list there, it pastes to the whole column. Click on the cell, write formula, use like B1, C1, etc. Then under the format above, there is copy, copy it. Then select the column by clicking to its header. Then under the sort above there is paste, paste it, it pastes it to all column, and changes the numbers of the row after B1, C1, etc, accordingly. I think this is all there is to know.

If you prefer spreadsheet, then use it, but i don't know why it's better.

There was a small difference between the Python results and the spreadsheet result of the output power, in the Python results it was 111.954, and in the spreadsheet result it was 111.908, and i cannot explain this. Nothing is wrong with the spreadsheet, i did the same calculation in LibreOffice Calc, and the result was exactly the same. The Python float numbers are double (64 bit) with 16 significant digits, so maybe it's about less precision in spreadsheets.

I forgot that this Python int() gives an error when the string is empty, that is with the list with only one number in a line, it will give error if one writes an empty line after the last line. So these Python scripts should be the following. Too many things to remember.

Quote
import sys

#Time scale in us
XU = 2.0
#Voltage scale in V
YU = 0.225
#Resistors 2 and 3 resistances in ohms
R2 = 987.2
R3 = 99.91
#Voltage of the power supply in V
V = 12.0
#Collector voltage in V
VC = 0.3
#Frequency in kHz
F = 110.001

#The length of a scale is 50 pixels
#In calculations XU and YU are in ns and mV for unit
#Voltages are in mV and frequency is in Hz
V *= 1000
VC *= 1000
F *= 1000
XU *= 1000 / 50
YU *= 1000 / 50
ilist = []
e = 0.0

for s in sys.stdin:
    if (s.strip() != ""): ilist.append(int(s))

for t in range(len(ilist)):
    vlr = ilist[t] * YU
    pr = vlr * vlr / R3 / 1000
    ilr = (V - VC - vlr) / R2
    plr = ilr * vlr / 1000
    pl = plr - pr
    e += pl
e *= XU / 1000000
print("Input power was %.3f uW" % (F * e))
 

Quote
import sys

#Time scale in us
XU = 2.0
#Voltage scale in V
YU = 0.225
#Resistor 3 resistance in ohms
R3 = 99.91
#Frequency in kHz
F = 110.001

#The length of a scale is 50 pixels
#In calculations XU and YU are in ns and mV for unit
#Voltages are in mV and frequency is in Hz
F *= 1000
XU *= 1000 / 50
YU *= 1000 / 50
olist = []
e = 0.0

for s in sys.stdin:
    if (s.strip() != ""): olist.append(int(s))

for t in range(len(olist)):
    vlr = olist[t] * YU
    pr = vlr * vlr / R3 / 1000
    e += pr
e *= XU / 1000000
print("Output power was %.3f uW" % (F * e))

« Last Edit: September 27, 2018, 12:17:54 AM by ayeaye »

Offline ayeaye

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 577
Re: Bifilar pancake coil overunity experiment
« Reply #96 on: September 27, 2018, 06:14:07 PM »
Spreadsheet of the input part.

Someone said maybe increasing R3 may help the coil to get more energy or such, i don't know...

« Last Edit: September 28, 2018, 03:21:22 AM by ayeaye »

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Bifilar pancake coil overunity experiment
« Reply #96 on: September 27, 2018, 06:14:07 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline ayeaye

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 577
Re: Bifilar pancake coil overunity experiment
« Reply #97 on: September 28, 2018, 08:35:55 AM »
Hi everybody

The current experimentations here and there with bifilar coils made me want to try it too (thanks guys). If anomalous results are observed, which remains to be confirmed, then we may have a theory behind it with nuclear or electronic spin resonance phenomena.  The NMR/ESR is the guiding idea that gets me started in experimentation, that's why I plan to change from conventional wire coils to flat copper tape coils. In spite it will not be an exact duplication of ayeaye's experiment, I would like to inform you that I started today. I failed to do a correct winding, the copper tape is very thin and easily damaged. I just ordered some of these tapes again, like these:
https://www.amazon.com/Double-Sided-Conductive-Shielding-Soldering-Electrical/dp/B074QN1YNH/ref=sr_1_25

These tapes should provide a higher capacity between turns. Although they are very thin, the effective conduction depth due to the skin effect is only 65µm at 1 MHz and 20 µm at 10MHz so we will not lose much of the effective resistance at RF frequencies.
I think another interest is the much better regularity of the electric field between the two tapes because of a constant spacing between conductors unlike wires of round cross-section.
The thinness of the tapes is also an advantage if nuclear or electronic spin resonance phenomena are involved, as there will be less dispersion of the magnetic field in the conductor bulk.
I hope for my first results next week (positive or negative!).

Great, F6FLT ! I'm sorry, i didn't notice your post, was busy here with other things. These copper tapes, would be interesting to make a bifilar coil out of these, then the capacitance between the bifilar coil windings would be likely greater than can be achieved in any other way. Will wait for your results with interest :) Hope that what is written here about how to calculate, etc, may help you in some way.

About other things, i tried the output part calculation now also with spreadsheet calculator. It is for linux, for windows all there is, is the following in github, and when one knows how to use that thing.

https://github.com/n-t-roff/sc

With spreadsheet calculator, the result was *exactly* the same as with python. This shows that some spreadsheets calculate with the same precision as python, though libreoffice calc is not one of these, and excel may also not be. Some scientific spreadsheets i think may also give the same results.


Offline ayeaye

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 577
Re: Bifilar pancake coil overunity experiment
« Reply #98 on: September 30, 2018, 07:28:05 PM »
I don't know what ones programming skills are, but below we will do it like spreadsheet, but not with spreadsheet.

In linux, there is a command line program named bc, that stands for "basic calculator". It is an arbitrary precision calculator, that is, it can calculate with any number of digits after the decimal point. By default, that is with the option -l, the number of digits is 20. It looks somehow primitive, and one may not believe it, but it is actually used by scientists. There is also the following windows version of it.

http://gnuwin32.sourceforge.net/packages/bc.htm

In windows, one should use the cmd console. For that in the windows explorer, go to the directory where your files are, then click on the address bar above, write cmd and press enter, this opens the cmd console in that directory. Selecting things and pressing enter will copy, and right click will paste there.

It's a problem to get a list into bc, as it wants things in the form like a[7] = 17. So, write the following script, that is create a text file and paste the following into it, like with wordpad. Maybe one can use bc also with some ide, but i don't know which one some may like. Then save it as tobc.bc.

Quote
for (j = 0; j < 134; j++) {
    n = read()
    print "a[", j, "] = ", n, "\n"
}

Provided that we have list of samples in the file list.txt, and that we also know that there are 134 numbers (again, we do calculations like in a spreadsheet), and that we have bc installed, write the following on the cmd console (followed by enter).

Quote
bc -l tobc.bc < list.txt > tobc.txt

Then write the following script that does the calculations, as you see, it calculates almost exactly like a spreadsheet. Save it as output.bc.

Quote
for (j = 0; j < 134; j++) b[j] = a[j]*0.225*1000/50
for (j = 0; j < 134; j++) c[j] = b[j]*b[j]/99.91/1000
for (j = 0; j < 134; j++) e[0] = e[0]+c[j]
e[1] = e[0]*2.0*1000/50/1000000
e[2] = 110.001*1000*e[1]
print e[0], "\n"
print e[1], "\n"
print e[2], "\n\n"
for (j = 0; j < 134; j++) print a[j], "  ", b[j], "  ", c[j], "\n"

Then write the following on the cmd console.

Quote
bc -l tobc.txt < output.bc > output.txt

The output is a bit primitive, as the bc language doesn't have the fancy things to write numbers in some format. The following is the output.txt, calculated for the output part like in the previous posts here.

https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/w5gBZkqtfV

The beginning of that output was the following.

Quote
25.44393954559103192763
.00101775758182364127
111.95435175818236334127

As one can see, the python result was correct, and the spreadsheet result was less precise, as i also said earlier. In fact, the python results were satisfactory. One can use spreadsheet as well when the precision is satisfactory, just that it has been proven now that spreadsheets are less precise than python, and in the scientific calculations they may in some cases not be satisfactory.

PS  For plotting, as one has to find that magic number, in whatever way, where the input part ends and the output part starts, to then split it into two lists of samples, for separate calculations of the input and output part. Other than doing it online as i did show earlier, one can also install the mingw version of gnuplot for windows, from the following link. There is a huge number of various plotting programs, whatever one may prefer, but gnuplot is the most classic.

https://sourceforge.net/projects/gnuplot/files/gnuplot/5.2.4

When there is a list of samples in the file list.txt, then run gnuplot and write  plot "list.txt"  followed by enter, this will plot a graph of it, it's that simple.

« Last Edit: October 01, 2018, 02:01:54 AM by ayeaye »

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Bifilar pancake coil overunity experiment
« Reply #98 on: September 30, 2018, 07:28:05 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline skycollection 1

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 32
Re: Bifilar pancake coil overunity experiment
« Reply #99 on: October 01, 2018, 02:56:53 PM »
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DbyNYn676dQ
On top, i have a "bifilar" pancake coil, in this experiment i have connected the pancake coil in one coil only, the other coil "induces" the current.

Offline ayeaye

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 577
Re: Bifilar pancake coil overunity experiment
« Reply #100 on: October 01, 2018, 08:22:06 PM »
P = V * I

This is true about any part of the circuit, no matter whether there are coils or no coils. Both for input and output power of that part of the circuit.

Now it may look like that when the coil conducts more, the power consumption of the whole circuit may look like more. Thus one may think measuring power consumed by the coil by a dissipation of power on a resistor in series with the coil, etc. This does not measure the power consumed by the coil, not what concerns physics, different from some possible practical purposes.

Why? First because this is how power is always calculated, this is how electric power is measured, any electric power. Because this is the physical meaning of electric power. Several people who here doubted whether it's right, are therefore wrong. They are wrong in terms of physics, and this is what matters for research. They may not be wrong what concerns how some or other circuits are made, but this is not about the physical meaning of power.

So ok for their particular circuits, when more current goes through the coil, then their circuit consumes more power. But this is only about how their circuit is made, it is about their circuit and not about the physical power consumed by the coil. How so? Simply speaking, the current that goes through the coil, is not consumed by the coil. Like when the coil had zero resistance at any moment of time, the power it did consume at that moment of time were zero, zero and not a bit more.

Because again simply speaking, the current that goes through the coil, is most often dissipated in some resistance, and released as heat energy, thus none of that energy is lost in the coil. How the current that goes through the coil is used in the circuit, that depends on the circuit, whether it is used somehow or just wasted.

But the purpose of this experiment is to measure the input and output power of the coil, coil and coil only. Not the power in some circuit that can be incredible wasteful as well. But how much power some wasteful circuit consumes, gives no useful information about the coil, none and nothing, thus it makes no sense to measure, and has no physical significance whatsoever about the coil.

Please understand these things first. It makes no sense to do the experiments to measure the power efficiency of a coil otherwise.


Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Bifilar pancake coil overunity experiment
« Reply #100 on: October 01, 2018, 08:22:06 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13824
Re: Bifilar pancake coil overunity experiment
« Reply #101 on: October 01, 2018, 08:45:07 PM »
You may want to review this PDF slideshow on power measurement, from IEEE:

http://ieee.rackoneup.net/rrvs/13/fundpwrmea.pdf

Offline ayeaye

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 577
Re: Bifilar pancake coil overunity experiment
« Reply #102 on: October 01, 2018, 09:03:39 PM »
You may want to review this PDF slideshow on power measurement, from IEEE:

http://ieee.rackoneup.net/rrvs/13/fundpwrmea.pdf

First of all, in this experiment the power is not measured by whole waveforms, so what at all has this to do with it?

This pdf is correct, but it is about something different. If you disagree and if you insist, i will talk directly to the IEEE guy, i'm sure he does understand.

But no matter what, you may notice even from that document, power is always  P = V * I  at any moment of time, this doesn't depend on what circuit or a part of it is measured.

If we measure power at an instant of time, then it's always  P = V * I . If we don't measure power at an instant of time, but measure like the amplitude of a sine waveform instead, then we have to multiply it by cosine fii, this comes from the waveform, not that power is any different. And even when we measure sine waves, no matter what circuit or part of circuit we measure, no matter whether it contains coils or contains no coils, power is always measured the same way, not different when it is a coil or the circuit or a part of it contains a coil, as you insist. It is never said in that pdf either, that a different equipment or a method of measurement should be used depending whether the part of circuit measured contains a coil or not, read by yourself if you don't believe.


Offline citfta

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 723
Re: Bifilar pancake coil overunity experiment
« Reply #103 on: October 01, 2018, 09:35:03 PM »
P = I * V is not correct if the current and voltage are not in phase.

Ayeaye it is very clear you have a great ability to write programs and make graphs.  But unfortunately it is also very clear you lack some basic understandings about inductors.  Every first year electronics student learns in the Elementary AC and DC class about ELI the ICE man.  That is a little saying to help you remember the difference between an inductor and a capacitor.  The ELI part stands for an inductor. That is what the L means.  You can also see that the E (voltage) is before the I (current).  That is because the voltage always leads the current in an inductor.  In other words they are NEVER in phase in an active inductor.  Therefore the formula P = I * V is incorrect.  By active I mean while the current is changing.  Once the inductor current reaches peak there is no more change and the inductor is then just a resistor.


In a capacitor the current leads the voltage and therefore we get the ICE part.

Respectfully,
Carroll

Offline ayeaye

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 577
Re: Bifilar pancake coil overunity experiment
« Reply #104 on: October 01, 2018, 09:45:41 PM »
P = I * V is not correct if the current and voltage are not in phase.

Holy cow, phase is only important when we measure a whole waveform, like when we measure the amplitude of a sine waveform and know that the form of the signal is a sine. But in this experiment we measure the power at every *instant* of time, during the waveform, not the whole waveform. And at every instant of time  P = V * I , at every instant of time, this is not true like for the amplitude of the sine waveform during all its duration.

I know what you are talking about, i learned about it in the university too. But i didn't learn electrical engineering, i learned automatic control, and there is often important to do measurement at every instant of time, and do calculations from it. Say you regulate a dc power voltage, it can change in every kind of ways, sure you cannot measure power by sine or any waveform, this and everything else has to be calculated at every instant of time.

To show you how the power calculated from the amplitudes of sine, comes from the instantaneous power, let's calculate a power of a sine signal, with amplitude 1, so that the voltage and power are shifted by 20 degrees. Using the following bc script, you can try it. We calculate it during a time 10000 seconds, and then calculate the same for the sine waveforms by  Vrms * Irms * cos(20 degrees) . The amplitude of both our voltage and current is 1, but by that equation both have to be root mean square, so it becomes  rms * rms * cos(20 degrees) .

Quote
pi = 3.1415926535897932384626433
pi2 = 2 * pi
#20 degrees to radians
r20 = 20 / 360 * pi2
rms = 1 / sqrt(2)
energy = 0
for (t = 0; t < 10000; t += 0.1) {
    current = s(t)
    voltage = s(t + r20)
    power = voltage * current
    energy += power
}
energy *= 0.1
power = energy / 10000
print "Power when measured at instants of time: ", power, "\n"
power = rms * rms * c(r20)
print "Power when calculated from the amplitudes of sine: ", power, "\n"
quit

The output of that script is the following. As you see, the results are quite close, and the results become closer the longer is the time over which we calculate it.

Quote
Power when measured at instants of time: .46983333927318779782
Power when calculated from the amplitudes of sine: .4698463103929541\
9202

So as you see, the instantaneous  P = V * I  is correct, different from that said.

« Last Edit: October 02, 2018, 12:47:05 AM by ayeaye »

 

OneLink