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

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: 83680
  • *Latest: dnz007

  • *Total Posts: 516044
  • *Total Topics: 15381
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 5
  • *Guests: 12
  • *Total: 17

Author Topic: Basic, beginner's information on the Testatika, with interpretive explanation  (Read 11299 times)

Offline the_big_m_in_ok

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2087
Hi all,

Rexresearch.com has a whole .htm page devoted to an explanation of the original Testatika with a commonly Internet-available rendition of the possible wiring schematic:

http://www.rexresearch.com/testatik/testart.htm

The beginner, myself included, may want to familiarize himself/herself with this information before moving on to more rigorous investigations or construction plans.
(NOTE: this Rexresearch file is lengthy, so load or print run times may by correspondingly lengthy.)


Also, this wiring diagram, identical to one in the file above, is available at...

http://www.progettomeg.it/testatika/fullcircuit.gif

...but the text is in Italian.  The link I gave is in English.


Enjoy.

--Lee
the_big_m_in_ok
« Last Edit: March 26, 2009, 04:01:56 AM by the_big_m_in_ok »

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy


Offline the_big_m_in_ok

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2087
Hi all,

Rexresearch.com has a whole .htm page devoted to an explanation of the original Testatika with a commonly Internet-available rendition of the possible wiring schematic:

http://www.rexresearch.com/testatik/testart.htm

The beginner, myself included, may want to familiarize himself/herself with this information before moving on to more rigorous investigations or construction plans.
(NOTE: this Rexresearch file is lengthy, so load or print run times may by correspondingly lengthy.)


Also, this wiring diagram, identical to one in the file above, is available at...

http://www.progettomeg.it/testatika/fullcircuit.gif

...but the text is in Italian.  The link I gave is in English.


Re-Edit:
The stated references for the Rexresearch patents above are okay as given, but the following ones are based on late 1800's--early 1900's 'influence machines' that were commonly designed during that time period:

U.S. Patent #1,198,889 
This one features what appears to be counter-rotating circular wheels similar to Testakita.  The best example I found searching.

Other patents include:

1,435,210
1,104,184
1,100,567
1,086,010
1,071,196
   893,979
   809,761
   779,190
   687,455
   575,231
   398,122
   168,018

These U.S. Patents can be viewed in .HTML and also downloaded in .PDF at:

google.com/advanced_patent_search ,  or,

www.pat2pdf.org


Enjoy.

--Lee
the_big_m_in_ok

Offline the_big_m_in_ok

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2087


I just learned that the following patent:[/size]


       Patent #893,979, won't run on:




pat2pdf.org


or...


google.com   advanced patent search


The number apparently was deleted and  it was stated on a conspiracy site that the Gov't was beginning to censor parts of the Internet that they wanted hidden from casual viewers or researchers.




--Lee

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Sponsored links:




Offline gyulasun

  • without_ads
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4011
Hej Lee,

I have done some homework and I found the patent US893979 at the places you did not...

At the pat2pdf.org site you need to put a leading zero before the patent number like this 0893979 and then it fetches.

(you have to enter a 7 digit number instead of 6, it cannot find 6 digit patent numbers, as is writen in the error message:
Patent not found. Please check the value you entered. Some pre-grant publications have leading zeros in the number section - try again with a leading zero.)

At google I received it also without any 'glitch' https://patents.google.com/patent/US893979A/en    (here no leading zero is needed.)

And it is available at EPO (European Patent Office) too, no problem: http://tinyurl.com/zmkebma   

Gyula

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13968
Whatever the Testatika might be (and I have my own ideas about that), it is _not_ an electrostatic influence machine.

There are many features of the device that would actually prevent any buildup of electrostatic potential that is necessary for a true influence machine to operate. The superficial resemblance to a Wimshurst machine is a Red Herring of the fishiest kind. I write this as someone with considerable experience with electrostatic machines of various types, as well as having a long history of researching the available Testatika information. I've even spoken with someone who visited Methernitha while Baumann was still living, who witnessed a demonstration and even held the smallest Testatika in his hands.

I sincerely doubt that the Testatika operates by any use of electrostatics, high voltage, ES induction or "influence".

Just my two cents worth, take it or leave it.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Sponsored links:




Offline sm0ky2

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3290
Whatever the Testatika might be (and I have my own ideas about that), it is _not_ an electrostatic influence machine.

There are many features of the device that would actually prevent any buildup of electrostatic potential that is necessary for a true influence machine to operate. The superficial resemblance to a Wimshurst machine is a Red Herring of the fishiest kind. I write this as someone with considerable experience with electrostatic machines of various types, as well as having a long history of researching the available Testatika information. I've even spoken with someone who visited Methernitha while Baumann was still living, who witnessed a demonstration and even held the smallest Testatika in his hands.

I sincerely doubt that the Testatika operates by any use of electrostatics, high voltage, ES induction or "influence".

Just my two cents worth, take it or leave it.

I respect your perspective on this issue,. and can see where from these conclusions could be drawn.
(see  below)
I too have spoken with people sent to Methernitha to investigate this technology, before Paul passed away.
(from what I understand, those now in control of the village are not currently permitting such visits)

I never received confirmation from my correspondents, as to whether or not these devices powered the village.
What we were able to determine, is that there are no (visible) power lines leading to the village, no attachments to the dwellings, outside of the network created by the multitude of testatikas placed around the village.

The local electric utility, located in a large city down one side of the mountain (some number of kilometers, that I had determined to equal a couple of miles away), claimed that they did not have any power lines servicing that community. They did not have any knowledge as to why their "lights were on".

So,. what is this device? assuming it really does power their needs (which is, at least to me, still speculative)
How does it function? Where does the energy come from?

At first glance, it looks like a whimshurst machine, with some funny collector screens on it, and a weired looking magnetic inductor coil (choke?)
the output is usable (non'static') electricity.

Now, we can convert static electricity to a lower voltage, but it is not "tame" like the electricity we use in our homes.
the inverse, we can take electricity from our wall plug and boost it up to a very high voltage,
  but it does not act the same as an induced 'static' charge.
The latter is more wild, uncontrolled.

Where-as, a stepped up wall voltage will behave consistently, in direct accordance to the impedance of air.
Our modern ICE vehicles rely on this for timing and spark gap.
Using a static machine (influence or friction) would result in inconsistent sparks and the engine would not run properly.

Why is that?

I will explain this, in my own words, from what I understand to be the true nature of our experience.
Some may not agree with my interpretation. Others may find it to be enlightening.
But in either case, I will attempt to share what is in my mind, in a way that it can merge to what is in your own mind.

For the sake of discussion, I state that:
the processes involved in frictional static-induction are
far too complex to put into realistic terms within the context of this discussion.

So, henceforth, my statements will apply strictly to machines of the influence type.
If this machine is anything that it appears to be, it is definitely of the influence type, not the frictional.
(this is affirmed by Paul, on many occasion)

When one considers the operation of an influence machine, there are two polarities, of equal potential.
[even in machines in which the potentials are asymmetrical, the charges are balanced in an understood manner]
Induction, as a function of the ionization of air, when charges are separated.
In theory, charges, when assumed balanced, are complimented when separated.
That is to say, whatever negative (-) charge you separate from the environment,
is matched by an equivalently available positive (+) charge,
as a direct result of the separation process.

This does not take into consideration a previously existing charge potential in the environment, but mathematically,
this can be accounted for, similar to an "ambient voltage bias" theory. In which, the ambient voltage potential,
(referenced to a theoretical zero v) leads to a higher quantity of either + or - charges available from the surroundings.
This, while does play with your numbers a bit, is irrelevant. You can bias your "0 line" to adjust to changes in the environment
and examine the machine on a base level.

So, let us assume, henceforth, that the air around us is perfectly "balanced", with + and - charges, that equal 0 net charge.
[it is in fact NOT, but we will assume that it is, to lessen the confusion]

Let us look at such a balanced influence machine, as the rotating cylindrical electrophorus, or the contra-rotating disks of the whimshurst machine.
Where-as we have a positive charge, induced by a nagative charge, and visa versa, in accordance with the motion of the charges,
and the inductance with respect to the surface area of the conductor.

Regardless of the "energy" value of the separated charges, the "input" of such machines is strictly a matter of the imparting motion to the mass of the conductor.

Mass is not equivalent to surface area on any terms, and as such, one can see mathematically, how these two energy values,
input and output, are not equal.

Such factors as moment of inertia, and friction on a bearing shaft,
do not equate to surface area and charge induction.

One can state that the latter is greater of the two, in most instances.
But what relevance has this to thermodynamic theory?

That's neither here nor there, because, as theory would indicate, the charges are balanced.
To get one, you must have first separated the other.

This is the operation of an influence machine.
You will not get more "current" or "capacitantly charged voltages", or however you want to look at it,..
Than is predicted by theory of separation of charges.

Move the charge, and it will induce charge in the other conductor.

Look at the water machine. (Kelvin?) move a drop of water with a + charge drop and it induces a - charge in another drop,
which makes the next drop + before it can make the next drop - and so on..

Imagine this happening millions of times per second, and this is what an influence machine does.
At least in the standard approach.

There is another type of influence machine, only a few inventors have used this, for reasons only known to them.

Everyone else seemed to have done it in the normal manner.

What am I talking about? hmm.. lets see...
how do I say this...

There was first a device, like the cylindrical electrophorus, in that a horizontal cylinder rotated.
This was only a physical resemblance, much like Pauls device is to a Whimshurst Machine.
In reality, There was not merely a separation of charges.
There was a charge.
And there were Non-charged conductors moving in the charge's field.

That is the best way I can describe the difference.

In one, you have two charges, moving against each other, inducing more of each other, in one another.

In the other type of induction, you have a single (static) charge, that induces a charge in a non-charged (neutral) conductor.
a modern day analysis of this type of induction, would be the charging of a capacitor, over rotational distance, rather time.
In this manner W.R. pidgeon was able to charge plates and discharge them several times per rotation.
by rotating them around the radius of a single, non-rotating disk.

Upon studying this, Pidgeon discovered, that if the rotating disk was a solid conductor, the charges would separate across the disk and collect in certain locations + and -, respectively.

It is understood by those that were sent to investigated the Testatika device, That this is the principals used in the "keys"
or "antennae collectors" placed in various locations around the rotating disk.
The locations are almost a direct representation of Pidgeons experiments in this area.

As mentioned near the beginning of this post, "static" electricity is not tame.
Magnetism affects electricity, in fact, when we induce electricity in a wire, it is already magnetically polarized.
This is why it does not behave like its' wild counterpart.
When a static discharge is passed near a magnetic field its' trajectory changes, as a function of the ionization of the medium.
When this medium is a metallic conductor, this factor becomes a constant, as a proportion of electrical conductivity.
Thus giving credence to the horshoe-magnet coils present in most of the machines. (not all had this, which was explained by Paul)

the voltage levels in the pidgeon experiments were a factor of a division of Pi, to the radius.

Where as, a 10-inch whimshurst achieves voltages around 10,000 Volts, as a function of  the radius to the surface area,
This holds similar in the Pidgeon experiment. a total imbalance, vs area. + and -, opposing one another.
and two specific points of + and - of lower amplitude located 90-degrees to the first pair.
[notice how induction machines of the first type have a 90-degree neutralizing rod or wire]

it is not always a perfect 90-degrees, as some of you may have noticed in your home-version of the whimshurts or such device.
due to asymmetries, often unnoticed by our feeble human eyes , charges can be greater to one side than the other.
[this kind leads back to "our environment is not really zero"]

The charges can be detected within your own pidgeon machine, using a variety of charge detectors,
in comparison to some ground or "neutral" point, with respect to the charges in the machine.
[Note, this is completely arbitrary to any potential of choice, which in itself is thermodynamically unequivocal]

Once located, you can adapt a variety of "collectors" to take these charged points and convert them
into the capacitance of another conductor.
For instance, a leyden jar, or rolled aluminum foil capacitor, or even just a hunk of metal...

the collectors will charge, according to a function of their capacitance, and the induction of the opposing (initial) charge.
Over the radius of the surface of the disk, at a given RPM.

this could be related to a solid-state capacitor, which dumps its' charge as it charges, into a much larger capacitor.

But rather than being 10kV charges, we are talking about a fraction of the 1/2 of 10Kv / %surface area of a grid or screen type conductor.
This surface area is actually a bit larger than a flat metal plate of the same dimensions.
We don't need to do the math on that here, but if you doubt that in any way, take the time to ask someone about surface area.

a (window) screen about the size of a U.S. quarter can pick up around the 100-300V range, on a 10-inch disk, at 30RPM
with a capacitance in the microfarads (sorry I don't have the data anymore on this)

they can be arranged in sets, according to your method of imbalancing the charges.
Pidgeon experimented with divisions of two, or three.

my own experiments extended this to sets of four and six, however in every case, my disks were rotated by artificial means.
namely a motor and batteries, our power supply.

What was undetermined by investigators was the means of motive force in the Testatika machines.
How, or why they seemed to turn themselves as a function of charge induction, was never determined.

This minor detail, might change ones perspective when it comes to "input" vs "output"...
any such output, however small,. when one considers the fact that there were ( I think they said 213? at that time) devices
spread throughout the village in various sized, with a rather long list of adaptations and attachments.

I would think it would add up to something usable.. even if all they did was light some lamps and turn a few wheels.

At face value, what the team stated time and time again, when asked:

This technology appears to be exactly what Paul Baumann clearly states that it is.
Electrostatic induction.

I was never able to bridge the gap between the pidgeon machine and the testatika.
no amount of magnetic fields or wires passing through them, have I been able to "unstatic" the wild electricity.

even at low voltages, once the air ionizes, it will jump right out of the wire and into the next.
its not the same creature.
I have tried horseshoe magnets, and coils precisely to the proportions used in many of the devices, with no affect.
[noted there is a misc. inductor of unknown intention often placed just prior to the magnetic charge converters,
    not understanding this may have affected the lack of results]

My conclusion of this device was that is it possible to obtain a low-voltage, high current, electricity from a pidgeon type machine.
In fact it is about twice that of which you could obtain, using a whimshurts and converting it down to a lower voltage.
And with half the friction because you are only spinning one disk.

How Paul converted this into a usable electricity was never understood, and how he spun the disk was either a hoax or a mystery.
 It was concluded, at least on the surface, these things were indeed powering their village.

















Offline sm0ky2

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3290
When we create an electric current through a metal, we are using the electrons in the metal substance.
these are all the same in a sense.
they have boundaries, passing information from one atom to the next.
taking the path of least resistance

induced charges are different in a tiny, but very important way.
the ionizing conductor is whatever is holding the charge at the moment.
this can be air, or metal or even an insulator.
(how does an insulator hold a charge?)
the charge sort of sits on it, like a fluid, and can be moved around...

these are presumable ions or anions, respectively.
it is a different physical situation than electron transfer.

while the mechanisms operate in a similar manner, they are the inverse of one another.
electrical charge through a conductor, sees the conductor as a resistance or an impedance, which defines its' current.

an ionic charge sees the conductor as a capacitance, or the ability to store the charge.
its' current is defined by the ionic field gradient through the medium.
Which is a function of the charge potential, not the conductivity of the medium.
This is because the medium is beyond the point of ionization, which means it acts as a pure conductor.

the current of the discharge is then define as a proportion of the charge vs a1/a2 of the surface areas of the two conductors involved.

in theory the current peaks at infinity for a finite period of time,
a division across the period (T) then defines the maximum (real value) of the peak.
subsequently, this also defines the voltage transferred between the two conductors, as a function of their surface area capacitance.
this function, multiplied by the frequency of the discharge, gives you the power transfer per second.

What to do with this "electricity"? im not sure.

electrolytic capacitors can convert it, but I do not know a way to prevent them from overcharging and destroying themselves.
voltages are not stable in this type of machine, the best one can hope to obtain at any instant, is an estimate, based on a series of attempts. Maybe it will pick up 100v, maybe it will pick up 300v.
maybe it will pick up 1.5kv, then go back down to 100v after 1/2 rotation.

how many atoms are in 3^cm of aluminum foil, that are within ionization range of the surface layer facing the inducing charge?
furthermore, how many of these aluminum atoms will become excited beyond the point of ionization and contribute to the total charge potential on the surface of the sheet?
furthermore, how many of these charges will be located where along the surface?
theory would tell you they are distributed evenly. and while this is true if the conductor is stationary and being measured.,..
when it is moving through the inducing charge field, they are localized across the gradient. areas of greater and lesser charge along the conductor. (like they do with an insulator? -- yes)
they do not migrate across the surface and balance out at the speed of light, like normal electricity.
the rate of propagation is subject to influence by other fields, including the one that is creating the induced ionization.

 so you really don't know what the charge is you are picking up instantaneously.
the wind could blow across the machine and all the numbers change.

also as I stated, it is completely arbitrary.
respective only to itself.

for instance, if the charge potential of a small machine gives you + and - 300v,
that's a 600v difference in potential.
it doesn't matter if you choose 0v, 1kv, or 50Mv as your bias.
which makes these machines great for adding to a current source.
adding to a current neither untames the polarized conventional electricity, nor does it completely tame the wild beast.
this is evident by the spark patterns. Which lead to a conclusion that the electricity is a combination of both.

whimshurst and pidgeon machines were adapted to drive a multitude of rotary disks for high current applications.
these were later replaced by a single metal disk, with connections to the inner and outer of the disk, that creates conventional electricity.

the attention should be paid to the magnetic coil and the self-looped inductor that proceeds it.
I am not sure how what or why this tames the wild electrical charge.
it may be a function of electromagnetic induction within the copper wire, and somehow grabs the ionic charge which then propagates down the copper, polarized like normal electricity. (that's a short short version of my theory anyways)
I could never get it to work.

If we can figure that out, we will be a lot closer to a replication.











Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Sponsored links:




Offline sm0ky2

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3290
going back and re-reading the translation done by Stefan on the rex page,

Observations made by the visitors, suggest that they did not actually "tame" the electricity either.
This may mean that a majority of the circuit is just misc. b.s. with no purpose at all.

Which has been suggested, but mostly dismissed as not likely.


Offline conradelektro

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1696
@TinselKoala and sm0ky2:

Since you both have a lot of experience with and thoughts about "electrostatic machines", you might want to look at two videos I posted recently at YouTube (switch to 1080p in order to see the photo with the circuit diagram at the beginning clearly):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jLCp68VX7NE  (Part 1)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PzoUiZnR5QA (Part 2)

https://www.youtube.com/user/conradelektro/videos  (all videos, the first two are about a "modified electrophorus")

You might recall that an electrophorus has to be "reset" before lifting the "top plate" by touching the "top plate" (i.e. grounding the top plate).

I came up with a circuit, basically a high voltage diode (HVRT200) between the "top plate" and the "ground plate" and two high voltage capacitors (1 nF  15 KV) to "lead out" the charge to a "load" which is a gas discharge lamp (CFL or cold cathode tube).

The two LEDs (and the protection BYT62 diodes) are only there to prove that during the up stroke (top plate is lifted) positive spikes occur and during the down stroke (top plate is set down) negative spikes occur.

There are several spikes per movement (up and down) because the gas discharge lamp ignites at a certain Voltage (e.g 500 Volts) and the Voltage is reached several times when moving the top plate up or down (charge separation).

My circuit turns an electrophorus into a "continuously operating electricity generator" (by moving the top plate up and down) without the need to reset it each time the top plate is set down. Of course there is very little electricity generated and only spikes. It is not spectacular and only of theoretical value (no practical purpose, there is much too little light generated by the gas discharge lamp and the diodes).

The idea is to redesign the known electrostatic generators by help of modern high Voltage diodes and capacitors in order to simplify the mechanics (brushes are a constant bother).

I started with the electrophorus because it is the most simple and the first electrostatic machine discovered (around 1760).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrophorus  this is the original electrophorus which I modified with my circuit (as shown in the attached drawing and in my videos).

May be you two experts have something to say. I do not start a thread because my electrophorus project is for sure not OU and has no practical application, just some sort of research into electrostatic machines.

Quote
In one, you have two charges, moving against each other, inducing more of each other, in one another.

In the other type of induction, you have a single (static) charge, that induces a charge in a non-charged (neutral) conductor.
a modern day analysis of this type of induction, would be the charging of a capacitor, over rotational distance, rather time.
In this manner W.R. pidgeon was able to charge plates and discharge them several times per rotation.
by rotating them around the radius of a single, non-rotating disk.

Sm0ky2, where could I get more information about the device of W.R.Pidgeon (may be links to resources on the Internet, if you have them on hand)? This "induction" had me puzzled several times when playing with electrostatic machines. The triboelectric effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triboelectric_effect (rubbing two materials against each other) is easier to understand than "induction".

Greetings, Conrad

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy


Offline conradelektro

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1696
I found two patents concerning the Pidgeon Machine (are attached).


These articles are not for free:

http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1478-7814/12/1/327/pdf

http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1478-7814/16/1/330/pdf


Some information can be found here: http://www.coe.ufrj.br/~acmq/electrostatic.html

The Pidgeon machine [26] was a Wimshurst machine with fixed inductors positioned in a way that increases the induction effect. Fixed inductors with same polarity of the opposite disk were placed surrounding, insulated, each neutralizer brush. The sectors were embedded in the disks [5][26][p53][p54][p111].  Pidgeon studied also machines based on "triplex Wimshurst" sections (double machines with a single central disk), with enclosed sectors, that produce more current. The first Pidgeon machine had a quite strange structure [p111], and the disks had slanted sectors for more uniform induction.
Piggott made a set of experiments with radiotelegraphy and "antigravity" using a compact double Wimshurst machine enclosed in a pressurized box. Drawings from his patent (1911) showing the machine.

Greetings, Conrad

Offline sm0ky2

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3290
Thank you Conrad

The triboelectric series (actually a series of series, depending upon the usage) give an easily understood representation of induction, since that each substance contains a natural charge (+ or -), when compared to another substance.
The mechanics that govern this can get very complex when looking at individual charge units.
there is not a standard equation that can relate force, friction, surface area, pressure, etc. to a particular value of charges.
We know there will be "some charge", but how much is seemingly random, at least within terms of defining a discrete value.

I could argue that all "friction" based static induction could also be achieved without physical contact.
albeit very very close, they do not have to actually touch in most cases.
Take any two materials from a series, and place them close together in the wind. each will gather an opposite charge.
the wind is acting as the charge carrier.
The same happens when you move them close to each other, the simple silk and polypropylene experiment can be done without frictional contact, by simply moving the plastic very near the silk.
 

Induction can occur through influence, using the triboelectric series.
It does not have to be a friction machine. Though the particular series used is often a different list, there are many similarities.
items at far ends of the series induce charges more easily than materials that are near the neutral line.

To better understand the induction process, and to maintain greater stability of the charge values, historical machines began
using like conductors to hold the charges. For instance, Aluminum has a great potential to hold a charge. + or -
When we move a charged piece of aluminum near another piece, it induces a charge in the second piece, which reinforces, or strengthens the charge in the first.
Continued motion in this manner, can saturate the conductor (maximum capacitance), or reach the breakdown impedance of
the shortest distance in the circuit between + and - charges (arcing).

What is interesting to note, is that the most powerful of W.R. Pidgeon's machines used a combination of both concepts.
Generally, like conductors were used to hold and induce the charges, in a similar manner to other influence machines of this type.
In addition to that, triboelectrically chosen materials were used to start, or reinforce these charges.
Most common was a hard rubber that is vulcanized with sulfur. It was originally the Goodyear Tire recipe.

This allowed pidgeon machines to be self-starting, whereas many whimshurst or other devices needed to be 'primed', or given an initial charge to begin the process.

the rubber was placed near where the "neutralizer" connections are made in other influence machines. between the + and - collection points. Conductors pass the material during the time when the charge is being induced, from the opposite conductor.
And chosen to be in the opposite polarity of the induction, so as to strengthen the effects.
the sulfur-doped rubber material was (-), and the conductor passed near this on its' way to the + collection point.
This aids the induction process at the same time a charge is being induced in the conductor from the oppositely charged conductor.

Making the charge points stationary, gives the machine a distinct advantage over Whimshurst and the like.
Since there is no need for a synchronization of multiple rotating disks. Any number of disk or disks could be moving at any speed or in either direction, and the induction effect remains unchanged.
Also, using multiple disks does not diminish the charge on the charged conductor. It in fact, strengthens it.
This is why pidgeon includes multi-disk versions of his machines in the patents.

What is often not shown in his patents, but is evident in variations of the devices he built, a (+) material can be used opposite
the location where the rubber is placed. Often this is replaced in drawings by a connecting (jumper) wire. In a similar manner to the function of the "neutralizer" rods or wires in other devices.

In short, influence machines that uses like conductors (such as aluminum plates), can be reinforced, or strengthened, by inclusion of the inductive effects found in the triboelectric series.
preliminary experiments along these lines has been shown to increase the output of a Whimshurst machine by placing materials at the neutralizer rods. When you only use one material (+ or -), short out the other end of the two rods to each other.
like if you have a piece of rubber at the bottom, jump a wire across the "tops" of the two rods. This balances out the charge point at the top of the disk, giving a neutral, or centerpoint between the two charges being induced at the bottom of the disk.

So, why Pidgeon vs Whimshurst? both machines seem to do the same thing right?
not exactly..

In a Whimshurst machine, the charges are constantly changing, (0) to (+) to (0) to (-) back to (0) again.
a good portion of the rotation is doing nothing but balancing out the separated charges, so that it can induce them again.

the stationary charge points in many of Pidgeons machines allow for continuous induction of charge potentials, which provides for a steadier and more abundant supply of charge at the collectors.
The charge is still "flipped" at the same points, as evident upon close examination of the charges during each part of the cycle.
However, the portion of rotation where they remain "neutral" or close to 0 (center point of potential) is greatly reduced.
More of the spinning motion is being used to induce (or separate) the charges.


Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy


Online citfta

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 834
Sm0ky2,

Thank you for all the time it must have taken you to type up these very long and informative posts.   There is a tremendous amount of good information in them.  I am going to have to read all of them several times to absorb all you have written.

Carroll

Offline conradelektro

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1696
The triboelectric series (actually a series of series, depending upon the usage) give an easily understood representation of induction, since that each substance contains a natural charge (+ or -), when compared to another substance.

I could argue that all "friction" based static induction could also be achieved without physical contact.

The same happens when you move them close to each other, the simple silk and polypropylene experiment can be done without frictional contact, by simply moving the plastic very near the silk.

Induction can occur through influence, using the triboelectric series.

It does not have to be a friction machine. Though the particular series used is often a different list, there are many similarities.
items at far ends of the series induce charges more easily than materials that are near the neutral line.

For instance, Aluminum has a great potential to hold a charge. + or -
When we move a charged piece of aluminum near another piece, it induces a charge in the second piece, which reinforces, or strengthens the charge in the first.

Thank you for the explanations. I will look for these triboelectric series, because I am always searching for materials which could be used as the cake in an electrophorus. But it seems that the "old cakes" made from sulphur, bee wax and tree resin diluted with turpentine are best (various recipes can be found in books from the 19th century). But such "old cakes" break easily.

Modern plastic materials are easier to get and to handle. But I have the problem, that I do not know the exact chemical composition of the plastic materials, so, it is hard to get the same material again (because the products in the hardware stores change). I got "good" plexiglass and "bad" plexiglass (should be Polymethylmethacrylat also called acrylic glass), depending on the manufacturer. Good or bad refers to the ability to hold charge. Sometimes it helps to sand the material to get rid of a coating (which is often a different material).

Since you mention aluminium, I observed that aluminium as a top plate in my electrophori diminishes the charge in the cake rapidly. (I get the cake charged by rubbing it with wool or an other suitable cloth.) Steel as a top plate seems to be beneficial (in the sense that the charge of the cake stays for a long time, days even a week).

At the moment I am building a crank mechanisms, which allows to move the top plate of an electrophorus up and down in a more uniform and repeatable way (first by hand and then with an electric motor). The necessary top plate movement is only 5 mm to 10 mm (depending on the load), but in order to make comparisons the movement should be uniform and repeatable. Uniform movement (stable up-down frequency and speed) is also good for scope measurements, again this helps to make comparable measurements.

For all interested in electrostatic machines I can recommend this web site: http://www.coe.ufrj.br/~acmq/electrostatic.html (I do not know the author, but I learned a lot from this site by studying the various electrostatic machines and from the patents and papers cited there.)

According to my humble opinion, one should go back to the electrophorus and from this base (first electrostatic machine in history) one should develop new electrostatic machines with modern high voltage components (HV diodes, HV capacitors and HV transistors). As I saw from my tests, everything can be kept below a few thousand Volts, even below 1000 Volt by "consuming" the charge by the load fast enough (which is easy with gas discharge lamps as a load). But I am thinking about using a HV transistor or two to build a buck converter type circuit to convert the charge from e.g. 1000 Volt down to e.g. 5 Volt. So, the electrostatic machine produces narrow spikes which are "consumed" at 1000 Volt (are truncated at 1000 Volt by being shortened into a capacitor) and are converted into wider 5 Volt spikes.

I think that I can get away with a IRF840 (500 V) or BUL7216 (700 V) or STP03D200 (1200 V)
http://www.mouser.com/ds/2/389/CD00174493-251211.pdf which base is switched via a small HV capacitor, which only transfers a small charge into the base. If the HV capacitor at the base of the transistor has about the same capacitance as the base of the transistor the Voltage in the base of the transistor can not rise much. This capacitance is in the order of a few pF. It is easy to build a HV capacitor with a few pF by placing a plastic sheet between two metal plates which can even be a variable capacitance by only partially overlapping the metal plates.

In short: The spark gap should be replaced by a transistor which switches when a certain Voltage is reached in the inductor of the electrostatic machine. The brushes should be replaced by HV diodes which only let the charge through in one direction (reset) and block the opposite charge (let it build up).

I also think that an electrostatic machine built in the right way is an AC type machine which delivers alternatively several positive spikes and then several negative spikes. Several spikes appear if the spikes are truncated at a certain Voltage because the "charge separation mechanism" builds up the Voltage several times till the inductors reach a certain distance at which the "charge separation mechanism" brakes down (due to practical limitations, either the inductors get to far apart or can not be closer than touching). This means that one gets a "positive channel" and a "negative channel" out of a true electrostatic machine. And it is difficult to combine these two channels because the output would cancel itself. This should be, because on average one has about the same number of positive and negative ions in the ambient air. If the supply of ions from the air is unbalanced the two channels will have a different "strength".

An old question is the grounding of an electrostatic machine. At first sight it works without a ground connection. But soon one observes erratic behaviour like charge reversal or sudden failure of charged up parts (sudden de-charging of parts which should hold charge). Proper grounding clarifies or cleans the electrostatic machine. Stray charges disappear and a symmetry between the positive and the negative channel is established. One can say that proper grounding allows to suck charge from ground or to push charge into ground in case imbalances or stray charges start to build up. Very often grounding is achieved implicitly because the stand (the structure) of the machine is grounded inadvertently. The ground connection can have several mega Ohm and still works. Grounding has to be good in case the electrostatic machine is operated at rather low Voltages (if the built up charge is "consumed" pretty soon at e.g. 500 Volt).

Greetings, Conrad
« Last Edit: February 23, 2016, 09:39:53 PM by conradelektro »

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13968
Smoky, most of what you've written about electrostatic machines is spot-on. Most, not all.  Now you have to ask yourself, with all that knowledge, why haven't your Testatika attempts worked? Why have no other Testatika "replications" based on electrostatics worked? Could it be because-- as I said earlier-- the Testatika is _not_ an electrostatic machine? You should be able to examine existing photos and drawings of the actual Testatikas and see for yourself why this is the case. Clearances, materials, construction, component placement, etc. all mitigate against actual voltages capable of producing "influence" or electrostatic induction.

For your amusement:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eogpGHFgV6E
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f-aP7sk48jw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YpemKuf6X_c
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ir9RIsXzmzY


Offline conradelektro

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1696
Could it be because-- as I said earlier-- the Testatika is _not_ an electrostatic machine? You should be able to examine existing photos and drawings of the actual Testatikas and see for yourself why this is the case. Clearances, materials, construction, component placement, etc. all mitigate against actual voltages capable of producing "influence" or electrostatic induction.

At the end of 1990ies I followed the Mathernitha story closely. Swiss authorities were pressing down on the Mathernitha because of questionable developments like taking money from old rich people who were lonely and in need of medical care and not providing appropriate care and also some children were held in bad circumstances (at least proper schooling was denied).

This Baumann Guru (their head honcho and alleged inventor) did all the things one should not do if wanting to convince the public that something works. All obvious measuring and examination procedures were denied.

The money making scheme of the Mathernitha was and still is not selling an OU-machine, it is taking money from people who are in need of medical help (mentally and physically) and who have some money. So, they do not bother with poor people. The OU-machine was a hobby of Baumann, some Guru thing amongst many other strange behaviours of Baumann.

Greetings, Conrad

 

OneLink