Use for the Tesla Switch

[Matthew Jones]

That motor won't help either. I'll explain.

If you use an inductive load on the tesla switch, you have a BEMF effect that will reduce the collected current. Transformers are the worst. Motors are bad but they have less of an effect as only one side of convetional motor makes the BEMF. Here's why..

I probably need to diagram this..but

In regular motor you have 2 poles present from permanent magnets. Your winding on the rotor create the other 2 poles for attraction or replusion or both in one pass. You could have 1 of three combinations in motor.

Replusion motor like pulse motor create the highest amount of BEMF do to the inductive spiking. The simplest form of this is a bifiliar pulse motor with the scondary windings disconnected from a power source and hooked to bridge rectifier.
The BEMF left over after the coil is charged creates a false ground. If this type of load is put on a ONE WIRE coil that energy is still present and has to be disapated by the incoming energy. This creates a ground scenerio. In which your loosing energy.
Pushing away from Multi poled motor acts the same.

An Attraction/Replusion motor Pulls the coil into place then switches the polarity and pushes it away. This also creates an equal amount of BEMF, BUT... Some BEMF does not show up under a Tesla switch. The BEMF produced will actually flow out of the system without disapating our current. But you still get a fair amount and it still causes this ground scenerio.

A pure Attraction Motor performs the best. The coils in the rotor are always charged opposite of the magnet. And so do to the state of the communtator they can never align but are always trying. Pulling in....
This produces the lowest amount of BEMF. Only the coil that is trying to line up to the north magnet creates BEMF that will not flow. The BEMF created on the south poled magnet does not show up in negative way. It actually adds voltage to the system rasing the potential in the coil.

I should probably add that that this is how I see it working with the aid of Oscope. I also measure the battery voltage and line amperage to help determined the more efficient of the setups.

The best possible Tesla switch/motor combanation I have been able to think of and test is a standard tesla switch driven with relays and the motor is permanent attraction but with the same pole on both sides of the motor.

I used 2 south pole magnets for stators and 2 coils independant of each other, both pulling into the magnets both charged to the north. The other thing that matters is how you wined the coils.If the switch is running the load from the ground side, You want a counter clockwise winding. The power from the ground side of the batterries goes into the start of the coil... charges the coil...then exits from the end of the coil back into the power recovery side.
I've only been able to test it once, It caused a good charging effect in the batterries. And the batterries maintained a room temperature. But the motor failed early and I haven't built another one yet.

Right now I am trying to work on semi solid state switching with high power transistors. This has turned to a whole new mess that kept me scratching my head for a couple of months now. But I got it worked and soon as its built and stable and tested, I'll post it. Then I'll rebuild the motor.

A big thing to understand in the Tesla Switch is the fact that it makes any load an open loop system. But you have to watch what and when enviromental energy flows into the system. Negative energy and Positive energy from the electron cannot co exist on the wire at the same time. They cancel each other out. But the positive energy from the HOLE current doesn't seem to have this effect when negative energy enters a system. They seem interact well. Maybe because they are all really the same thing, I don't know. You got to find that combination of Load and system that allow for the enviromental energy to stay in the system with out disapating the positive energy your using to do work with. Or ideally do work with the negative energy and gain more everytime you do. but....

Hope you guys follow what I am saying..

Cheers
Matt

[thaelin]

Where is the HB motor?

Hi, I was wondering if you have had any contact lately with Jack? I was following his progress for a while and then he started to have problems typing messages and then just up and quit posting. Has not logged into OU for some time as well. He had a sweet piece of work for sure.

thaelin

No no no you are not babling. You are helping us to understand what is going on.

On a second note you are very correct that the requirements for the relays are the limiting factor. One thing you can do is actually reduced you load! The motor is the key here and there is a new motor on the horizon that might help with that. It is called a flux gate motor and is currently being developed by Hilden-Brand. What it does is actually direct the magnetic flow of two banks of very strong magnets to a central position causing rotation of the rotor with the combined magnetic attraction of the banks of magnets with lower current coils. here is a picture for you to check out the design. This might be the key to cut down the current required to activate the flux gate and hence lower the current that needs to pass thru the relays and still have great power to boot.

Picture: http://i128.photobucket.com/albums/p...xgatemotor.jpg
Blue is energized coils and red is normal off coils.

It is kinda a leeskalnin design or based off that design. It might be interesting to further study this and see if improvements could be made to facilitate a lower requirement for switching so relays could be used without burning them out.

I tried asking everyone before what they thought about this design but no one really replied... weird...

[Jbignes5]

sadly No...

Nope not a word from Jack. It has me wondering whats going on there. But his concept is pure genious. Who would have thought it would take less energy to direct the flow of magnetic flux as it does to create the magnetic flux in the first place. It definetly has me thinking that even if we get the best energy system that the motors are so inefficient that it would just be a waste. But then again this motor has a lot of merit to it and it should be expanded on. Like I said I tried to post about it on this forum and didn't really get any hits at all. No one had any real comments on it or for that fact any improvements to mention. I mean the motor is super simplistic it needs more to it to make it worth the investment to build. The way I see it it would cost about 2-300 to build a prototype with all the best stuff like silicon steel and neo52 mags but no one has tried to replicate this on here.... Hmmm I wonder why?
Well this has nothing to do with the Tesla switch so If you would like to comment or even add to my post please do.
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewa...ead.php?t=4277

[lamare]

Charging in series, discharging in parallel

I'd adventure that the energy wasted on resistance (e.g. the coil and the diode) is smaller in the serial test (the time for the current to drop to zero is about half). .

All right, I admit. I was a wrong about not being able to explain more efficient charging, when charging in series with classical models.

However, that does not mean this principle is useless at all. After all, we can conclude it *is* more efficient to charge capacitors, as well as batteries, in series.

Having said that, the other half of the story, charging with radiant energy, will also be more efficient when charging in series. Therefore, I believe this principle will prove to be an important key into turning devices harnessing radiant energy that are on the edge of COP 1.0 into COP > 1.0 devices.

As I explained in previous posts on this thread, radiant energy travels as waves outside of our circuits, which means we have to consider our circuit as a sort of wave guide when thinking about the phenomenon assiciated with radiant energy spikes. As I explained before, diodes or transistors are not fast enough to switch or otherwise control the flow of radiant energy, beside that they operate on the energy flow *inside* the circuit only...

Therefore, the answers to controlling/designing radiant systems lie in the spacial design of the circuit. By using different lengths of wires, one can control the relative timing of when the radiant spike arrives at a certain point in a circuit.

From this line of thinking, I came up with a circuit design that might be used as a basis to charging capacitors in series and discharging them in parallel.

The scetch shows a bunch of capacitors in series, with some resistors in between. When the transistor is open (non-conducting), the capacitors are in series. When the transistor closes, drawing current, the capacitors are in parallel due to the diodes. Of course, the transistor will have to be open well before the moment the radiant spike leaves at the coil.

The question of course is: do we gain anything with this, or will the additional loss resistors spoil the whole game?

[Jbignes5]

@ Mathew

What about shunting the bemf of the motor back to charge a cap then recycle it into the motor so that it doesn't even affect the tesla switch? It could even be a part of the motor cicuit since some motors need a driver cicuit anyways it would make what comes out of the switch exactly that and non reflective as bemf from the motor get reused.

[Matthew Jones]

@Jbignes5

The problem there is how to redirect it. About the time it shows up, it wants to head towards the higher potential.
I have several pulse motors that are open loop and do switch off anything that shows up after the initial pulse including the energy I put in. But in this case none of those motors perform as expected. You would expect them to perform as a normal power source. But it doesn't.

Like I said to generate any power on the shaft with it you have to generate a BEMF that will flow out of the system and ad additional power. This can be done and it should perform as would be expected from a high torque motor.
You just need a few more bells and whistles and some simple rulles to follow.

Mind ya, this just where I am heading. There very well maybe a way to go about it as you describe. I might be wrong, I have been before. So if your testing don't just take my word for it. Try it.

My stuff is creeping along right now cause I'm building a home. Towards the end of summer I am going full swing. I'll be able to get more answers together then.

Cheers
Matt

[Jbignes5]

Mathew

Why not use any form example bemf from bedini type Fast switching Diodes Redirects the flow to a cap which also has a fast switching diode as well to add to the normal charge after the bridge rectifier. Kinda like a one way loop back system. Like I said the motor will need a controller like any motor on a scooter would have from my reference. Hence this motor would have one too. It actually could be used like a sudo regenerative braking cicuit on like a scooter controller or any good pwm motor controller would have. I bet it could be done with some experimenting.
Oh on another note I lost two batteries before i got to test the switch you provided me go figure. So that is on hold atm. Right now I am looking into improving the motor design to get way more out then in like this hilden-brand motor.
But I shall not go too much into details friend since this is about the switch and not the motor.

[Matthew Jones]

Thats what I'm telling ya. It won't work the way you expect it too.
With the Tesla Switch setup, the potentials are always exposed, or the amount of offtime is so minimal that the extra energies travel to the source battery or to the opposite source battery before they travel to any other point. Even a cap inline will only have a detrimental effect. The positive energy in the cap will be reduced from the negative coming in.

Its hard to explain, you have to see it to understand.

Matt

[Jbignes5]

I think you cant see it because I am not explaining it right. The recapture cicuit would be after the bridge rectifier and the looping circuit would also be after the bridge. Not going back to the batteries but back to the motor. Most motors that are used for scooters are pwm motors and so is the motor I am looking at. The input of the motor is only 150 ma just enough to guide the magnets field from blue to red. With the combined pull of stacked mags i figure I could get 300 lbs pull from each side. But I guess I'll have to put it together as a prototype with less powerful mags and experiment from there. With the current off it would recycle the field flux in the ends like a leedskanin type setup until current is supplied then it would shift the flux to the central part combining the flux of both sides saturating the core and spining it to correct orientation- up down. This would be a pulsed motor. Timing would be a factor and getting that timing right between pulses and recapture would be tough but not impossible.

[redeagle]

What about shunting the bemf of the motor back to charge a cap then recycle it into the motor so that it doesn't even affect the tesla switch? It could even be a part of the motor cicuit since some motors need a driver cicuit anyways it would make what comes out of the switch exactly that and non reflective as bemf from the motor get reused.

You cannot collect the bemf. This force in brushless motors occurs during the powered phase there is no actual current flowing backwards just an increased resistance to flow. If you were to attempt to capture it you would have to turn off the power from the tesla swtich. Because that resistance is created by voltage you will not be able to get the capacitors fully charged before the switch reverses current.

Solution is to have a non-inductive motor that minimizes bemf. Sort of like a starter motor. A static magnetic or em field and a armature with brush contacts for the rotor coils.

[kent_elyue]

I have been researching the Tesla Switch for some time now. I don't know if I can shed any light on the subject or not, but perhaps I can rekindle some interest in the project.

I started off very simply in attempting to understand the original circuit as it appeared on John Bedini's website. I started off with a single battery and a dpdt switch (see schematic) which I flipped by hand, in effect reversing the battery polarity with each switch. I was trying to understand the concept of Tesla's OSC and how the large capacitor's act as energy sinks, and how the energy flows between the sinks (the plates of the two separate capacitors) whenever the potential on the opposite plates of the capacitors is changed. This helped me understand the concept of "one-wire" energy flows, and how it can be shuttled around at will, and even through a load if one desires.

Further, I read Tom Bearden's document regarding Bedini's method of forming a negative resistor in a lead-acid battery. As I understand it, an oversimplified explanation of the theory is this: In order to create a negative resistor in a battery "you wish the ion current in the battery to be about 180° out of phase with the electron current in the load". Tom says that you need to switch the high voltage spike across the battery in 5 nanoseconds or less, and 1 nanosecond is even better. This will overpotentialize the battery briefly (20 to 40 nanoseconds tops) and the overpotientialization can be quickly redirected into an external load. If you can time the next overpotentialization correctly, the battery will continue to charge, and the load will also continue to be powered. This requires "microwave switching techniques".

I see this as an indication that the timing is the most critical thing. As Tom Bearden states in the same article, Bill Nelson (a Microwave switching engineer) "reasoned that the motor was just a load, and all the action was in the battery as controlled by the switcher. Bedini confirmed that this was correct." Bill Nelson's replication used an ordinary lamp for the load and also kept it's own batteries charged.

Tom Bearden points out that "getting everything timed just right, is still a significant undertaking". To me, the timing is where I need to focus my attention.

I've read this thread with interest, and noted another important (at least to me) thing. There was a mention made regarding the "David Bowling continuous charging device thread" wherein a Tesla Switch was built and tested, but subsequently abandoned because after 4 test-cycles the batteries were taking far too long to charge. In Tom Bearden's document on Negative Resistor effects in Batteries, Tom makes it clear that a battery that has been charged with negative energy ("conditioned", if you will) will manifest EXACTLY that effect when placed on a normal charger. I take that to mean that they (the experimenters) were very, very close to getting the timing just right.

I've been playing around with simple variations to the circuit I've attached. I've discovered that there is a lot more going on in even a simple circuit like this than they ever teach you in school. One unexpected thing I found was that if I connected a 10:1 transformer across the AC side of the bridge rectifier, the motor speeds up, as if to indicate that there is some ringing going on between the capacitor plates, not to mention that I can get rectifiable high voltage out of the secondary winding.

In attempting to understand the solid-state version I have come to appreciate that the transistors must somehow come to have their own forward bias voltages applied in a way that is completely electrically-independent from the rest of the circuit. I figure this concurs with Tom Bearden who states that you always have to pay for the switching. Bedini's circuit seems to use the independent transformers to alternately forward bias the transistors into an ON state, and then reverse bias them into an OFF state.

This leads me to wonder if perhaps there is a clever way to utilize the AC shuttling between the capacitor plates to self-resonate a specially wound transformer that has 6 separate (very low voltage) output coils that could be properly phased to drive the sets of switching transistors. The rise and fall time of each transistor would, I imagine, be the critical limiting factor to applying the overpotentialization within a 5 nanosecond or less time span. Things such as transistor over-saturation would matter greatly under conditions like this.

Intuitively I think that the exact 50% flip-flop effect is critical to circuit operation, but that doesn't, I think, mean that the transistors themselves are conducting 50% of the time. There must be a very brief lag as forward-bias voltage rises when the transistors are still off, and this would allow the overpotentialization to "relax" into the load before the next cycle sling-shots the lead-ions once again.

There is so much more to learn, and discover, and figure out. But I'm trying...

[Matthew Jones]

In attempting to understand the solid-state version I have come to appreciate that the transistors must somehow come to have their own forward bias voltages applied in a way that is completely electrically-independent from the rest of the circuit. I figure this concurs with Tom Bearden who states that you always have to pay for the switching. Bedini's circuit seems to use the independent transformers to alternately forward bias the transistors into an ON state, and then reverse bias them into an OFF state.

Remember Transistors have come along ways since that paper was wrote. If you settle on the fact that it has to cost, you may not be looking hard enough for alternative switching combinations. Low power, high speed SSR's , and mosfet combinations hold more promise every day.

I see this as an indication that the timing is the most critical thing. As Tom Bearden states in the same article, Bill Nelson (a Microwave switching engineer) "reasoned that the motor was just a load, and all the action was in the battery as controlled by the switcher. Bedini confirmed that this was correct." Bill Nelson's replication used an ordinary lamp for the load and also kept it's own batteries charged.

I am not sure I agree, the type of load is as important as the rest of the setup. Loads need to be configured differently based on the output wave form. Transformers may hold the key to an "any load solution", but to date I have seen nothing but loss from conventional step up or step down transformers.

As far as timing goes it is the most critical part. But based on the load type resonating the load and the switching with each other is the key..

Cheers, its nice to have you here.

Matt

[kent_elyue]

Hello Matthew. It's a pleasure to make your acquaintance.

My plan is to build a mechanically-switched device first. I'd rather like to replicate the one I see in the video you have posted on you-tube. I have some specific questions about it.

I'd like to try calculate the approximate switching frequency of your unit. What speed does the motor run at? What is the circumference of the wooden spools that make up the switching mechanism? It looks like there are 4 switches made per revolution, making 2 complete switching cycles per rotation, but what is the duty cycle? Were you striving for a particular value when you made it? Is it your opinion that a different switching rate (faster or slower) would have any effect? Do you think the internal resistance of the motor windings is very critical?

I have many other questions, but I'm sure a lot of them will be answered when I get my own device working so I can play with it.

Any information, and insight you have would be welcome and most appreciated.

Thanks for sharing your time and experience with me.

-kent

[Matthew Jones]

The motor was running at or about 1200 rpms. Yur right about 4 switches per revolution. Duty cycle may have turned out a little off but was supposed to be 50. Since the communtator was hand built it may have been flawed here and there.

If I were planning another machanical I would do it different. But it worked.

I am trying for a solid state but I got alot going right now. Just moved and I am building a house.


Cheers
Matt

[kent_elyue]

Matthew,
Thanks for the info.

My buddy just finished renovating a 100+ year old house. Then he tore down the old dilapidated barn and now he's building a nice big workshop. The plan is to build up a Tesla switch device and work on a Kromrey converter, too. Anyway, I've helped him an awful lot over the past year, so I can empathize with the lack of time and energy which conflicts with the eagerness to get going again. So I once more thank you for your time and trouble.

I'll keep lurking here (and periodically asking questions) until I have something slightly newsworthy to report.