Author Topic: Self running coil? (Read 304601 times)

gotoluc · « **Reply #255 on:** March 21, 2010, 10:34:22 PM »

Quote from: gyulasun on March 21, 2010, 09:33:27 PM

Hi Luc,

Mark also found an even better type:
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=8892.msg233538#msg233538

And it is at newark.com:

http://www.newark.com/jsp/search/results.jsp?N=0&Ntk=gensearch_001&Ntt=STS2DNF30&Ntx=mode+matchallpartial&suggestions=false&ref=globalsearch&_requestid=114222&isGoback=false&isRedirect=false

MAybe it would be worth trying too.

Thanks for the new video, I am surprised you found using a second pick up coil already reflects back to the tank circuit?

rgds, Gyula

Hi Gyula,

yes, amazing specs!... I read that post after I posted. I'll look into it and see if I can buy a few.

It was a surprise to me to see the current increase and decease connecting and disconnecting the load to the second pickup coil. It did not do this previously when the loop was not closed.

Do you think if the pickup coils were tuned it would have less of a coupling effect with the primary coil?

Seeing this test 10 video do you think it is worth continuing?

Thanks

Luc

HarryV · « **Reply #256 on:** March 21, 2010, 10:35:43 PM »

Quote from: gotoluc on March 21, 2010, 08:56:01 PM

Hi everyone,

I had a little free time while my son is visiting his mother and made a new video.

However, it's not showing any over unity

Sorry this may not be what we were hoping for $:-\$

Let me know if I'm missing something.

Luc

Link to video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c7CsBr7ouPE

Try sliding the stack of magnets inside the pickup coil.

Harry

gotoluc · « **Reply #257 on:** March 21, 2010, 10:40:12 PM »

Quote from: HarryV on March 21, 2010, 10:35:43 PM

Try sliding the stack of magnets inside the pickup coil.

Harry

Sorry Harry, that will makes things worse.

Luc

mscoffman · « **Reply #258 on:** March 21, 2010, 10:42:12 PM »

gotoluc:

After looking at Self running Test Video #10...Don't give up too quickly.

#1 - I notice you have not produced resonance in the pickup coil
by adding a capacitor right across the coil before the diodes. Maybe
you can measure the inductance of that coil. And then use a Web
resonance calculator to find the best cap and then tune it by adjusting
the capacitor slightly to see if you can use resonance to boost the
3.81Vdc Drive signal up by any. It would be interesting to see
if resonant coil tuning effects the main circuit tuning. This drive
level is now low for the IRF640 but as I have said I think more
in line with what a IRF510 requires.

#2 - Another thing worth trying is to try to use a voltage doubler, voltage
multiplier after the coil to get the power voltage on the NE555 up. This
will probably not do much now cause it will just load the coil more and
the gate drive energy is being wasted. But in the future it may make
the circuit more reasonably like signal generator drive.

#3 - Once you have a better transistor we may be in overunity
territory slightly...The transistor will behave better. plus energy to
the gate is currently being wasted driving the transistor will be
retained.

#4 - I am hoping you have full frequency agility with the NE555
to go where the overunity wants.

Overall I'm am somewhat positively impressed by what I'm am seeing.
You have generated some kind of a gate drive signal with just this
one pickup coil and that gate drive is in-line with what I expected
to be needed for the new transistor. The CMOS NE555, it seems,
is doing it's thing.

Any additional pickup coil may want to direct it's energy back to
main battery.

:S:MarkSCoffman

HarryV · « **Reply #259 on:** March 21, 2010, 10:45:21 PM »

Quote from: gotoluc on March 21, 2010, 10:40:12 PM

Sorry Harry, that will makes things worse.

Luc

I am thinking about how to tap the vibration of the magnets with a coil.

gyulasun · « **Reply #260 on:** March 21, 2010, 11:04:11 PM »

Quote from: gotoluc on March 21, 2010, 10:34:22 PM

.....

Do you think if the pickup coils were tuned it would have less of a coupling effect with the primary coil?

Seeing this test 10 video do you think it is worth continuing?
....

Hi Luc,

First Q: No it would not have less coupling effect with the primary, unfortunately.

Second Q: Yes, another MOSFET type that has about 1/10 of the capacitance values than the IRF640 has would be worth trying. Much useful input energy is comsumed in the rather high gate-source capacitance now.

rgds, Gyula

gyulasun · « **Reply #261 on:** March 21, 2010, 11:31:05 PM »

Quote from: mscoffman on March 21, 2010, 10:42:12 PM

...
#1 - I notice you have not produced resonance in the pickup coil
by adding a capacitor right across the coil before the diodes.

...
@mscoffman

Could you consider connecting the needed capacitor in series with the coil, not in parallel?
I ask this because a parallel resonant LC circuit has a high impedance at resonance and the most output can come out if you terminate it with a load that has the same value high impedance (condition for matching).
And even the CMOS 555 itself, together with driving the MOSFET, would not present a high impedance load that would be measurable to the LC resonant impedance.
By using a series resonant LC circuit, it has a low impedance 'output' (which is practically the pickup coil's copper resistance), this should be a more favorable generator output impedance for a load like even the CMOS 555.
The diode bridge of course can come after the capacitor too, one AC input goes to the series cap, the other AC input goes to the free coil end.

Can you agree with the series LC instead of the parallel one?

By the way if I saw correctly, Luc used a half wave rectifier, a single diode only for the pick up coil, but a diode bridge should be used, especially in the tuned case.

Quote

#4 - I am hoping you have full frequency agility with the NE555
to go where the overunity wants.

The CMOS TLC555 has a 2.1MHz typical frequency in astable mode, this is far better than the bipolar 555.

rgds, Gyula

mscoffman · « **Reply #262 on:** March 22, 2010, 01:13:55 AM »

@gyulason and gotoluc;

I have an even better idea. If gotoluc happens to have a small audio
output transformers available. audio 10Hz->22Khz Should handle
the 35KHz sine wave ok.

Use the signal generator sine wave output at 35Kh to evaluate
the audio transformer to have some step-down ratio. then put
a 3K resistor across the secondary and drive primary from the
pickup coil. You'll want to maximize the voltage across the 3K
resistor. Using various different transformers, center taps and
so on. I'll bet you can get it significantly higher than the 4.2Vpp
it probably is now. We want to examine 6to1 stepdown ->
2to1 stepdown ratio range.

Then substitute the bridge rectifier leads for the 3K resistor.
We probably have an impedance mismatch between that
coil and the NE555 + gate. NE555 + gate ~= 3Kohms. That
is wasting energy. This is based on the 60Vpp? on the
pickup coil unloaded. The coil should be operating closer to
this value but we are just pulling it down.

I we get it to 11Vdc or higher we should use the variable
potentiometer in series with the gate idea to trim it.

:S:MarkSCoffman

Magluvin · « **Reply #263 on:** March 22, 2010, 02:24:31 AM »

Are we talking about using an audio transformer to isolate the sig in to the fet gate?

I see the transformer as a pump of sorts and power on the input actually transfers power to the other side. Its a power in power out kinda thing. ;]

The optical is the best way. Imagine, we have optical sending internet, so freq is not an issue, and quality of signal conversion should be good also.
I have to say that all that is needed is a mosfet driver that is triggered by the optical device. And if it is 50% duty and a square wave, it should work perfectly.

I also imagine the use of a zener to keep the voltage on the charge cap leveled out at some point.

Mags

LightRider · « **Reply #264 on:** March 22, 2010, 03:29:07 AM »

Finally, with a similar setup, the observed effect seems to be reproduced.

Input signal (Fonction generator model : GFG-8019G) @ 39.6 kHz - 8 vpp (square)
the circuit works on a 9v battery.
Adjustments and measurements made with an old 20Mhz Dual Trace Oscilloscope (ET & T 3132)
9.10v in the cap -> goto a maximum 12.10v (when disconnected) in a few seconds and stays there.

(a video is possible if necessary)

...under testing...

LightRider

wattsup · « **Reply #265 on:** March 22, 2010, 03:34:15 AM »

@gotoluc

Saw your last video (10) with thanks. You sounded kind of pessimistic but don't let that get you down cause you just looped your first one so CONGRATULATIONS are in order. That one step is major.

I am not convinced you have the right or best frequency to look at this.

First of all, don't get all bogged down about the mosfet leakage. It is less then peanuts and not worth looking at. If guys want to know, just put a bulb or led on the mosfet drain and source and pulse the gate. If that gate has any meaningful voltage with enough north/south potential being leaked, that led will light up, but it will not. lol

If you have time, please just try this.

1) Put your 9 volt battery back on the 555 circuit.
2) Put a small bulb on the pick up coil. Remove the pickup coil from the stand it is on so you can move it around the toroid.
3) Pulse the toroid and move the pick up coil and find both the best frequency and position where the pick up coil lights the light brightest.
4) If you have the patience, try removing the magnets to see any difference. Then when you find the brightest spot, bring down the applied voltage to the toroid to see how much you really needed to keep that pickup coil bulb lit. Then play with the duty cycle to find the same. Sometimes lowering the voltage by 40% will reduce the brightness by 5% so this becomes a good deal to not only look for the brightest but most frugal settings.

Advise the result.

Now if you add another pickup coil, you may have to find the new frequency or frequencies that will light both bulbs brightest, etc. In my videos, I had found frequencies when using solo coils, but had to find new frequencies when several coils where on the toroid. You can load that toroid to the hilt.

Oh, I tried my bucking coil with your series jump connection and it does give some nice effects. I will learn more first then give some results. I had prepared a much longer post but will keep this one short instead.

wattsup

NextGen67 · « **Reply #266 on:** March 22, 2010, 05:06:42 AM »

Quote from: gotoluc on March 21, 2010, 10:34:22 PM

Hi Gyula,

yes, amazing specs!... I read that post after I posted. I'll look into it and see if I can buy a few.

It was a surprise to me to see the current increase and decease connecting and disconnecting the load to the second pickup coil. It did not do this previously when the loop was not closed.

Do you think if the pickup coils were tuned it would have less of a coupling effect with the primary coil?

Seeing this test 10 video do you think it is worth continuing?

Thanks

Luc

@Luc,

YES! it is definitely worth continuing.

A few things happen in your video #10 that makes it rather logical why you have amps draw now [tough if you do your comparison test, you will find a *very* tiny difference].

What happened:

1) although you are at a 90 degree angle with the resonance coil, your pick-up coil *actually* drains energy from that toroid coil, because it is way to close to the toroid coil... Since it has 5 layers [instead of just 1], you are 'stealing' energy from it

2) the mosfet is triggered with not enough energy to *properly* operate... Yes, the coil is in resonance, but you earlier found gain effect is very very limited now. See the data sheet of your FET and notice *how* high Ciss (and the other 2) are BELOW the 2.5 volt [that is why 5v and up would be better] .... So even with *optimal* tuning, the resonance will not be as good as you had before.

3) 5 volt and upwards is better to see for PtP [this is even true for the fet you might want to buy next].

So all with all, test #10 gives wrongly data.

What you *could* do, and will *definitely* show the differences with your earlier scope shots you put on the board here is:

1) Just feed the 555 with external power for a while (battery), and remove your pick-up coil. [Make sure you have at least a PtP as what you had before what was 7.81 V if I recollect well].

2) Tune your circuit into best possible way again.

3) Save 2 scope shots of it (like the same as which you posted here before).

3) Now lower the PtP to the 3.81 volt [as what you had in your video#10].

4) Tune your circuit into best possible way again.

5) Save 2 scope shots of it (like the same as which you posted here before).

6) Post the 4 scope shots again.

What you might see your when you do these tests, would probably be that your 7.81 and 3.81 images give [firstly] quite similar pictures, but if you look closely, especially that *bump* you mentioned earlier before and the horizontal line of the OFF phase, you probably see difference there.

Secondly, when you would do the 'energy going up in Cap' again (where it wend up from 16.64 volt to 16.80 volt [as shown in video#7], you would [and *should*] have the same or better result [with the 7.81 PtP]... Try that again.. you should get a raise from 16.64 to 16.80 volt over *exactly* 20 seconds (well might be 20.5 seconds).

When you repeat the same 'energy going up in Cap' again but now with the 3.81 PtP you will *most likely* notice that [in comparable way !], the energy going in the cap has a much lesser charge rate.... Actually I wonder if you with a PtP of 3.81 volt still can get a decent 'charge back' at all.

Don't for a second think of giving up yet :-)

When you put up the 4 scope shots again [as i mentioned above], at least we all can see what is the differences between them, and the difference with the one you posted here already.

EDIT: What I try to establish here is to show that [by using the 555 now], we are *still* able to get the same scope shots as you posted before here. Because if those scope shots [especially the 7.81 PtP one] shows *less* performance, that should be adressed firstly.

--
NextGen67

gyulasun · « **Reply #267 on:** March 22, 2010, 12:12:35 PM »

Quote from: Magluvin link=topic=8892.msg233725#msg233725 A=1269221071

Are we talking about using an audio transformer to isolate the sig in to the fet gate?

I see the transformer as a pump of sorts and power on the input actually transfers power to the other side. Its a power in power out kinda thing. ;]

The optical is the best way. Imagine, we have optical sending internet, so freq is not an issue, and quality of signal conversion should be good also.
I have to say that all that is needed is a mosfet driver that is triggered by the optical device. And if it is 50% duty and a square wave, it should work perfectly.

I also imagine the use of a zener to keep the voltage on the charge cap leveled out at some point.

Mags

Hi Mags,

Sorry but MarkSCoffman did not mean using the audio transformer to isolate the sig to the FET gate. He proposed a possible impedance matching with the step down audio transformer to utilize the output power from the pick up coil in the best way for feeding the CMOS 555 with supply voltage.

Basically I agree with his proposal, it is a kind of impedance matching anyway. The pickup A is made parallel resonant with a capacitor at the output frequency and the audio transformer steps the (hopefully) 30-40V peak to peak resonant voltage down to a 8-10V at its secondary output that would be full wave rectified for feeding the 555 pulse gen that drives the MOSFET gate.

Of course if the pick up coil would have some taps in its winding, say at 1/4 and at 1/2 of its full number of turns, then the transformation could be done by the pickup coil itself, at the tuned resonance freq.

rgds, Gyula

gotoluc · « **Reply #268 on:** March 22, 2010, 07:27:00 PM »

Quote from: NextGen67 on March 19, 2010, 03:54:11 PM

Gyula,

Would it not be possible to simply attach only the signal generator to the mosfet and then connect the Cap to the source and drain, and just observe what goes into the cap ?

Actually a [known] voltage/amperage could be supplied to get it at the correct working point, but this can with a calculation be subtracted from the cap value later again?

EDIT: No need to attach battery I guess, since the signal generator can easily deliver enough voltage ? Anyhow, after say 5 minutes of charge, one could see how much the cap collected.

--
NextGen67

Hi NextGen67,

I have done the test you asked for in the above post to determine how much is leaking through the gate. More tests are also coming

Supply Battery connected to capacitor bank to first tune the circuit is 12.88vdc

Setup is using signal generator and feeding 3 IRF640 connected in parallel

Tuned for maximum returned current -.000224 @ 38KHz (with no pickup coil)

Once signal generator is set there is no changes to it as you can see in video.

Link to video demo: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MX2nZSOhxfc

1st Shot is Scope probe across Generator input, the other probe across a 100 Ohm resistor in series with Generator ground and coil tuned to send back most energy.

2nd Shot is Scope probe across Generator input, the other probe across a 100 Ohm resistor in series with Generator ground with source & drain to cap through coil

3rd Shot is Scope probe across Generator input, the other probe across a 100 Ohm resistor in series with Generator ground with source & drain to cap no coil

skywatcher · « **Reply #269 on:** March 22, 2010, 08:24:41 PM »

I think i can give an explanation for the raising voltage in the cap.

The tuning with the magnet has to bring the core material *close to* saturation. That's the reason why the magnet must not be too strong, or too close to the core. If the magnet already saturates or over-saturates the core it doesn't work. The magnet drives the core into a non-linear state so that it acts like a rectifier.

Here are more details: http://www.linux-host.org/energy/srect.htm

The pulses going into the gate of the MOSFET are leaving the MOSFET on the other side as AC voltage, because of the gate capacitance. This AC voltage may be rectified by the 'magnetic rectifier' and will increase the cap voltage, if all the other losses are low enough.

Of course, this is no 'free energy'.
It's a well-known effect which was discovered more than 120 years ago... $:-\$

(maybe it would be a good idea to read some old books... some things have already been forgotten)

News:

User Menu

Author Topic: Self running coil? (Read 304601 times)

gotoluc

Re: Self running coil?

HarryV

Re: Self running coil?

gotoluc

Re: Self running coil?

mscoffman

Re: Self running coil?

HarryV

Re: Self running coil?

gyulasun

Re: Self running coil?

gyulasun

Re: Self running coil?

mscoffman

Re: Self running coil?

Magluvin

Re: Self running coil?

LightRider

Re: Self running coil?

wattsup

Re: Self running coil?

NextGen67

Re: Self running coil?

gyulasun

Re: Self running coil?

gotoluc

Re: Self running coil?

skywatcher

Re: Self running coil?