author=EMJunkie link=topic=8341.msg480096#msg480096 date=1460266545]
 



   Chris Sykes

But the other is measuring Current. Which is not the EMF of the Source.

That is correct. But the EMF of the source is in phase with the current.
See scope shot below,where we are measuring both source current and EMF across the source--they are in phase.CH1 is current through the source,and channel 2 is the EMF across the source.
Remember-low frequency,and open secondary.

Dont agree entirely here, this is dependant on the Passive Inductance's and or Capacitance's present, or Purely Resistive, Load characteristics in the circuit.

Yes,all that matters,and must be taken into account. But remember,we are discussing the answers provided in regards to the schematic posted with the associated scope shot.

It is not only possible, but common to see Voltage and Current in Phase, or very close to it on the Terminals of a "Generator" - Again this depends on the Load. It is also possible to see a Phase Shift of 90 Degrees as you have shown.

Yes it is,but if there is no load on the output,then there is no current. If there is no current,then the EMF on the output will be determined by the rate of change of magnetic flux through the coil-we are assuming normal operating frequencies of the generator here.
I am happy to build up a small generator,and show you if you like.

The issue is, Faradays Law of Electromagnetic Induction, by definition, predicts EMF, The E.M.F and B are Two different things.

That is correct. But as in my schematic and associated scope shot,the rate of change in the increase and decrease of B around L1 is what determines the EMF value across L2. The EMF value across L2 is greatest when the rate of change of B is at it's greatest,and that point on the scope shot is when the current trace is passing through the 0 volt line-not the peak current points.

So no Sir, I dont agree.

I can tell you,that in regards to the generator,there will be 0 volt's(no EMF) across the output of the generator when the core of the generator coil is receiving maximum flux coupling from the PM-the magnet is directly lined up with the core of the output coil. This is the point of no rate of change between an increasing or decreasing magnetic flux through the output coil.

As it stands, the equation for Faradays Law of Electromagnetic Induction (E.M.F = -N dϕ_B/dt), does not, at all, predict a Phase Shift of 90 Degrees between E.M.F (measured in Voltage) and the Magnetic Field (ϕ_B) or any other angle as a mater of fact between these two quantitys E.M.F (measured in Voltage) and Magnetic Field (ϕ_B)!

It dose when the secondary is open,and no current is flowing through it-as in my posted schematic,and we are confined to the parameters of the test,where normal low operating frequencies were used that are close to what the transformer was designed for.
Of course different transformer configurations,and higher frequencies will show varying result's as far as phase alignment go's between the primary and secondary EMF.

Faradays Law of Electromagnetic Induction does predict a Phase Shift of 180 Degrees, thanks to Heinrick Lenz, from the Source E.M.F and the Destination E.M.F

You need to specify the type of transformer,as this is not always the case-even at low frequencies.
The transformer i am using in my experiments at the moment,is an air core transformer with a winding ratio of about 50:1. I have a 5ohm resistive load on the secondary.
The second scope shot below shows the EMF across both the primary and secondary-where the blue trace is the primary EMF,and the yellow trace is the secondary EMF. The secondaries EMF is close to 90* out of phase in relation to the primaries EMF,not 180*. As you can see on the scope shot,the frequency is very low.

Please compare the equations, they are not even close to the same!!!
TK was wrong and should Correct himself!!!

Chris
TK was correct in what he described,where he said-Quote:
Brad, your scope shot shows the expected 90 degree phase difference as predicted by Faraday's Law: The induced (negative) EMF in the second coil is proportional to the _time rate of change_ of the inducing magnetic field from the first coil.

That statement is absolutely correct in regards to the schematic,probe placements,and scope shot i provided.
The peak EMF produced across L2 is when the magnetic field produced around L1 is at it's greatest rate of change--not at it's maximum amplitude. The point of no change of the magnetic field around L1,is when the current is at it's peak,meaning that the magnetic field produced by L1 has also reached it peak amplitude. As the magnetic field is no longer changing in amplitude,the induced EMF across L2 will be zero-see scope shot 3 below.


Brad

author=EMJunkie link=topic=8341.msg480096#msg480096 date=1460266545]
 



   Chris Sykes


That is correct. But the EMF of the source is in phase with the current.
See scope shot below,where we are measuring both source current and EMF across the source--they are in phase.CH1 is current through the source,and channel 2 is the EMF across the source.
Remember-low frequency,and open secondary.

Yes,all that matters,and must be taken into account. But remember,we are discussing the answers provided in regards to the schematic posted with the associated scope shot.

Yes it is,but if there is no load on the output,then there is no current. If there is no current,then the EMF on the output will be determined by the rate of change of magnetic flux through the coil-we are assuming normal operating frequencies of the generator here.
I am happy to build up a small generator,and show you if you like.

That is correct. But as in my schematic and associated scope shot,the rate of change in the increase and decrease of B around L1 is what determines the EMF value across L2. The EMF value across L2 is greatest when the rate of change of B is at it's greatest,and that point on the scope shot is when the current trace is passing through the 0 volt line-not the peak current points.

I can tell you,that in regards to the generator,there will be 0 volt's(no EMF) across the output of the generator when the core of the generator coil is receiving maximum flux coupling from the PM-the magnet is directly lined up with the core of the output coil. This is the point of no rate of change between an increasing or decreasing magnetic flux through the output coil.

It dose when the secondary is open,and no current is flowing through it-as in my posted schematic,and we are confined to the parameters of the test,where normal low operating frequencies were used that are close to what the transformer was designed for.
Of course different transformer configurations,and higher frequencies will show varying result's as far as phase alignment go's between the primary and secondary EMF.

You need to specify the type of transformer,as this is not always the case-even at low frequencies.
The transformer i am using in my experiments at the moment,is an air core transformer with a winding ratio of about 50:1. I have a 5ohm resistive load on the secondary.
The second scope shot below shows the EMF across both the primary and secondary-where the blue trace is the primary EMF,and the yellow trace is the secondary EMF. The secondaries EMF is close to 90* out of phase in relation to the primaries EMF,not 180*. As you can see on the scope shot,the frequency is very low.

Chris
TK was correct in what he described,where he said-Quote:
Brad, your scope shot shows the expected 90 degree phase difference as predicted by Faraday's Law: The induced (negative) EMF in the second coil is proportional to the _time rate of change_ of the inducing magnetic field from the first coil.

That statement is absolutely correct in regards to the schematic,probe placements,and scope shot i provided.
The peak EMF produced across L2 is when the magnetic field produced around L1 is at it's greatest rate of change--not at it's maximum amplitude. The point of no change of the magnetic field around L1,is when the current is at it's peak,meaning that the magnetic field produced by L1 has also reached it peak amplitude. As the magnetic field is no longer changing in amplitude,the induced EMF across L2 will be zero-see scope shot 3 below.


Brad

I am sorry Brad, reading your first paragraph, this is not always the case! You know it. I have read the whole lot, to show respect.

Brad, you believe what you want, in the end, this will catch up with you and you will see the truth!

You have an old washing machine motor there, Spin it Up and test and verify the phase relationships with different Passive Components...

   Chris Sykes
       hyiq.org

Here is a video showing the effects of an oscillating magnetic field against transformer action.
How dose the oscillating magnet allow so much more power dissipation,while reducing the power to the source that drives the oscillating system.

Comments and thoughts welcome from all.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mlb79xSh93w

Brad

You make it difficult to respond, your tone is slightly offensive, as if you feel threatened.  I am not here to offend nor defend.  The laws you place at the feet and under the nose of those who choose to enter your sand box, I don't recognize.  I have a different perspective, one where Lenz isn't a cancer.  A perspective which allows me to see the oscillator which forms the superstructure of every electrodynamic machine I have ever worked on.  A perspective which enables me to identify the higher order of capacitance and inductance as they relate to that super structure.  A perspective which has facilitated the ability to produce and reproduce the self reinforcing self oscillation effect that you mentioned, but in my opinion don't necessarily demonstrate in your "public" demonstrations of the same. 


One can also consider the chart you recently posted, where EMF associated with self and mutual induction are illustrated.  I understand from my own effort, how to setup a generator so as to negate the negative effects associated with induction. 


I contacted you in the past because I felt our paths were aligned.... I am not looking for a guru, not looking for someone to point at the answer to my question for me.  I don't need your data nor anyone else's. I have what I want.  It would be wise of you to humble yourself.  To think one knows more than one who claims to know nothing, can place one in a very precarious position when the right questions are asked, and you cannot answer them but the one who knows claims to know nothing can. 


I would like to respect that this thread has a very specific direction, and as such will continue this dialog with you, if you wish, on your thread.




Regards

Yes, if you like.

I never claimed, ever, that I am a guru, infact, quite the opposite, I have said on may ocasions, "I dont have all the answers"!

I am offended, completely, that the Scientific minds of the world think they know so much, that something so simple, is impossible.

So many minds here are suffering from: "Carpium Chronicus"

Many paths lead to Rome,

   Chris Sykes
       hyiq.org

Is part of the answer in the parts underlined in red....emphasis on "part"?

The proper relations need to be made, and there are parts missing.......my opinion...

Wanted to add one thing.....


Consumption decrease is the indication that the circuit is governed by the negative effects associated with opposition to change in flux and or current.  This is not something I look for, as it limits system effectiveness.  It seems like a good thing, consumption dropping and the output going up, however, in reality (as I interpret it), the input is working against the self induced (standard), and the boost in the output of the secondary, could be summed up to there being at least two augmenting induced currents operating in the secondary.





Regards

Well,i will wait and see if any others care to comment first--maybe PW,or verpies?.

But lets look at what happens when the oscillating magnet is introduced into the system.

The primary coil must now do extra work in order to give rise to the oscillating PM at the resonant frequency of the PM and fixture of the PM. We know energy is being dissipated from this oscillating system by way of vibration and noise. We also see a vast increase in the energy being dissipated over the 5 ohm load resistor that is across the secondary coil. But at the very same time,we see a decrease in power input to the primary coil that is now driving the second system(the oscillating magnet)

The oscillating magnet supplied more energy to the secondary coil than  the primary coil did,and yet it is the primary coil that is providing the energy to keep the magnet and stand in it's resonant oscillating state. then there is also the 90* phase shift between the primaries current,and secondaries voltage across the dissipation resistor when the oscillating magnet is bought into play-something to think about . Then there is the magnetic fields to consider-both the PMs field,and the primary coils field. The PMs field remains the same polarity,but varies in time- where the primary coil is the view point. The primaries magnetic field however,alternates in polarity over each cycle. We now have an effect where the two fields will be in bucking mode through 1/2 of each cycle,and in attraction mode during the other half of the cycle,and yet we see no such distortion in the secondaries wave form,where one half of he secondaries wave form should increase due to the bucking fields strength increase,and the other half of the secondaries wave form should decrease,due to the two attracting fields of the other half of the cycle. But in stead,we see an increase on both 1/2 cycles on the secondary,but a decrease in the primaries current draw-even though the primary coil is now doing more work.

Anyway,we will see if any others have some thoughts toward this.

I now have a small 13 watt amplifier,so i will be building a bigger unit soon.


Brad

Brad:

Some advice:  If you are going to post a diagram, and least try to have what you see in the diagram make sense.  In your diagram the output waveform shown does not match the physical setup shown, it's a mistake.

Indeed I am being somewhat picky here, because most people will understand what is going on.  The problem is that often enough you are dealing with people that don't understand what is going on and therefore they can easily be misled and confused by confusing graphic images that have errors in them.

MileHigh

I have found that there are two very specific geometries that one should look for, specifically:

            *  (a) where the point of maximum flux change is not coincident with the point of maximum flux density, peak voltage is just before and just after TDC.  (Two voltage nodes centered by a current node)
            *  (b) where the point of maximum flux change is coincident with the point of maximum flux density, peak induced voltage will be at TDC.  (Two current nodes centered by a voltage node)

Regards

Erfinder:

If you are going to talk about geometries and the outputs you can get from those geometries, then please go ahead and put up some physical and electrical diagrams of the setups that you are discussing along with voltage and current timing diagrams that illustrate exactly what you are saying.

What you are saying is cryptic, and I am not convinced of what you are saying at all.  However, you seem to be stating things in relatively simple terms.  Hence the request to explain precisely what you mean with the aid of associated mechanical/electrical diagrams and their voltage and current timing diagrams.

Thanks,

MileHigh

   I can see this as becoming known as the "Junkie-Tinman Law"

LOL

And here is the "Postulate of Blank Stares:"

What if ϕ_B is 4?

What if ϕ_B is 17*(sqrt(t))?

What if ϕ_B is A*cos(omega*t)?

What if ϕ_B is K(t^3.67)?

What if ϕ_B is B*sin(omega*7t)?