Single Wire Transmission through Earth

[kavkav]

Has anyone done the single wire transmission experiment? If you got it to work with one wire, and wish to replace the one wire with the earth itself, how much voltage is required for x amount of distance from 3 feet deep into ground in order to receive the power at high efficiency?

Thanks.

[dR-Green]

My unscientific estimation is approx 3-4 volts for around 30cm distance, probably a bit more with 3 feet of depth and well tuned coils. Experiment and see.

[kavkav]

My unscientific estimation is approx 3-4 volts for around 30cm distance, probably a bit more with 3 feet of depth and well tuned coils. Experiment and see.

Thank you for the reply. Have you tested this or anything similar before? If so, how were your results like in terms of efficiency?

Thanks.

[dR-Green]

Yes and no. I used a very experimental setup so I can't speak of any efficiency, but I think you would do very well to get in the region of 98% efficient like Tesla said.

This is what I did, the ground rods were 20-30cm deep and 25-30cm apart

Tesla Wireless Telluric Transmission Test-01 - In The Snow - YouTube

The power dissipated by the transistor is about 370mW, 9v supply with 47 ohm output impedance so very low power used for test purposes and the receiver is a flat spiral so there's no matched coils or anything, just basic tuning. I don't think anyone is likely to give you an accurate answer so the best thing to do is try it and find out.

Although I should probably point out there are legal issues with this and the authorities probably won't look kindly if you intend to use big amounts of power, you should avoid broadcast frequencies particularly emergency services and military and what not. Amateur bands and a license is the safest and least trouble causing route.

[kavkav]

Yes and no. I used a very experimental setup so I can't speak of any efficiency, but I think you would do very well to get in the region of 98% efficient like Tesla said.

This is what I did, the ground rods were 20-30cm deep and 25-30cm apart

Tesla Wireless Telluric Transmission Test-01 - In The Snow - YouTube

The power dissipated by the transistor is about 370mW, 9v supply with 47 ohm output impedance so very low power used for test purposes and the receiver is a flat spiral so there's no matched coils or anything, just basic tuning. I don't think anyone is likely to give you an accurate answer so the best thing to do is try it and find out.

Although I should probably point out there are legal issues with this and the authorities probably won't look kindly if you intend to use big amounts of power, you should avoid broadcast frequencies particularly emergency services and military and what not. Amateur bands and a license is the safest and least trouble causing route.

That's amazing!! Thanks for sharing that, it gives me hope with mine.

I'm sending about 6.9 watts of power at 555KHz. I don't think it would be strong enough to interfere with anything. I'm using cylindrical coils though. I have a flat coil but I will test that after my cylinders work because they operate at a lower frequency than the flat spirals.

I have one more question since I am amateur with circuits. My coil impedance is not high enough to prevent significant current going through it with no load. Therefore it drops the voltage a lot. So correct me if I'm wrong but whatever the voltage parallel to my input coil should be the same voltage parallel to my output coil right? That's how I would measure efficiency, including measuring the current through the coil with the same load on input and output.

Anyway your video was awesome, you should do a cleaner one during the day time because hardly anyone believes you can send power through one wire let alone through the ground with one wire.

[dR-Green]

You're welcome, and thank you.

My coil impedance is not high enough to prevent significant current going through it with no load. Therefore it drops the voltage a lot. So correct me if I'm wrong but whatever the voltage parallel to my input coil should be the same voltage parallel to my output coil right? That's how I would measure efficiency, including measuring the current through the coil with the same load on input and output.

You mean the primary coil impedance? Under those conditions the primary coil should be getting as much as your power supply can supply and that's why the voltage drops, it's not powerful enough to keep the voltage up over the given impedance, it has to go flat out just to get whatever voltage there is. But that's a whole other problem in itself.

I think what you are talking about is transmission efficiency. I.E. how much power is going into the earth from the transmitter, and how much power is received at the receiver. Not how much power the power supply is using because the components will be dissipating heat etc, so the actual power supplied to the transmission system will not be represented by the total power input. The efficiency of the power supply is another thing and shouldn't be counted if you are measuring the transmission efficiency.

Although yes you are right in that the higher the voltage in the transmitter primary then theoretically the higher the voltage will be at the receiver. But you can also play with the turns ratios to affect things like that. For proper measurement it should be a matter of power (watts) difference between one end of the transmission line and the other, output vs input (or I suppose transmitter output vs receiver output). On the receiving end I would either put a meter between the receiver and earth (probably not very accurate), or use some known load. On the transmitting end a meter between the secondary and earth will show the power into earth. But these things are tricky if not impossible to measure if you don't have RF equipment. You could use small filament bulbs as an indication of the transmitter output instead of a meter, but that won't work the same at the receiver input.

[kavkav]

I should have been more clear. I meant the impedance of the primary coil of the transmitter.
I'll explain my question in an example. In a cellphone charger that we plug into a wall there is usually transformer. But let's say we don't plug the phone into the charger while the charger remains plugged into the wall. The primary of the transformer still runs a little bit of current but not much due to its high impedance to the 60 Hz. BUT if lets say the impedance wasn't high enough, then we would not get 120 volts across the transformer primary thus resulting in a smaller voltage than needed in the secondary (so instead let's say 120v to 12v, we may get 30v to 3v if impedance isn't high enough.

What I just explained is my understanding of how it works but correct me if I'm wrong.

So if correct, my transmitter primary coil has low impedance and has a low voltage drop but higher current running through it.

So my question is (assuming perfect identical windings of both coils): Whatever voltage and current across the the primary of the transmitter should be equivalent to the primary of the receiver (primary of receiver meaning the coil with fewer windings when the voltage gets stepped back down) ?

I will measure efficiency by measuring current and voltage to determine wattage but I just want to make sure I'm understanding all this.

I hope that wasn't confusing, I appreciate your help.

[garrettm4]

Hello Kavkav,

I think your a little bit off with your transformer understanding, with reference to the wall charger situation. Impedance of the transformer isn't really of immediate significance, it is the phase angle of the current flowing through the transformer which makes it appear as reactive or real power. Impedance of the load (wall transformer) can be anything you want, as long as the source impedance is low enough to supply it without causing a voltage sag. With a constant frequency constant voltage source, the voltage across the wall transformer will remain constant despite a change in load impedance (but to a realistic limit).

Concluding, when you attach a load to the secondary of the wall transformer, the current flow in the secondary lowers the inductance of the primary which then permits more current to flow in the primary with reference to the constant frequency constant voltage mains supply. So there is NO to little voltage drop at the primary side (unless you have a very low impedance load with reference to the source impedance).

The way I see the one-wire Tesla transmitter working is as a form of transverse to longitudinal bi-directional converter. The primary takes in normal transverse energy and converts it through a complex form of loose coupling and self-resonance at the secondary into a longitudinal form, which can then be recovered at a distant location by a similar unit in receive configuration where the secondary converts the longitudinal energy back to transverse for use at the two turn primary output. The extra coil seems to help increase the ground current pumped between the two units but isn't an absolute requirement.

It would seem that everything is in a 1:1 arrangement with no impedance transforming operations observed from input of Tx primary to output of Rx primary... but I wouldn't assume that the voltage at the receiving unit should be the exact same, as there will always be losses in the transverse to longitudinal conversion process (pri. to sec.) and the long distance transmission (Tx to Rx) process involved with everything... but for the most part I agree with what you've said.

[kavkav]

I think I understand what your are saying. But I'll explain what happened.

My function generator has a source resistance of 150 ohms. I measured it's voltage during a 555KHz signal using my oscilloscope and it read about 9.7 Volts.
Then I connected the function generator probes to the primary of my transformer during the 555KHz signal. I measured the voltage in parallel using my oscilloscope. I thought it should reda the same voltage as before, 9.7 Volts. However, it measure something like 2.4 Volts. My transformer had no load on its secondary and was an open circuit.

I think it is because the coil impedance of the primary and the source resistance of the function generator acted like a voltage divider.

This is why originally I thought, my coil impedance must be higher so that when it acts as a voltage divider, most of the voltage would go across the transformer.

So is it possible that my measurement was like that because it could have been acting like a voltage divider? And if so, would increasing the impedance of the coil (by increasing its inductance) resolve the problem?

Thanks.

[dR-Green]

In practical terms, as in what you "see" on the bench, and what you have described:

In a cellphone charger that we plug into a wall there is usually transformer. But let's say we don't plug the phone into the charger while the charger remains plugged into the wall. The primary of the transformer still runs a little bit of current but not much due to its high impedance to the 60 Hz. BUT if lets say the impedance wasn't high enough, then we would not get 120 volts across the transformer primary thus resulting in a smaller voltage than needed in the secondary (so instead let's say 120v to 12v, we may get 30v to 3v if impedance isn't high enough.

The voltage also depends on the available current. If you consider it as DC, if you were to do that with the mains supply then there is more than enough current available and you would get the full 120 volts across the load. Voltage = current x resistance. In this case the wire would start to melt. But if there is not enough current being supplied, then it can't maintain the voltage, and the measured maximum will be the maximum power output of your power supply, and there's not a thing you can do about it without increasing the power since you deliberately want the load to be minimal resistance. A signal generator might be safe but a transformer is likely to start melting if it's too small for the load.

I've been learning about RF amplifiers recently and source and load impedance seem to be important things, which introduces a problem because you are right in that this essentially acts as a voltage divider. The output impedance of one stage is matched with the input impedance of the next stage, so you are dealing with half the voltage at the input, which back to the earlier solution means you need to compensate if you intend to get a specific output over a given load.

As an example, an amplifier with a gain of 1 will have an effective gain of 0.25 of the input voltage across a matched load impedance. The voltage is halved at the input, and halved over the load, so just to get unity gain you need to design the amplifier for 4 times gain.

Increasing your primary inductance would have the desired effect, but also many others. It would be better to use a lower impedance source, or make an amplifier to increase the available power etc.

[kavkav]

Awesome I think I get this now thanks. Originally I wasn't sure what the problem was and thought the voltage drop would occur in my amplifier setup but now that I know it's a voltage divider issue and may not affect my setup. Unfortunately though I don't have the right value power resistors or regulator to be using a 90 volt power supply so I have to settle with 60 Volts. This brings the power down to about 2 watts (according to my simulation) being sent through the ground.

I'm very new to mosfet amplifiers so all that voltage for only a couple watts is the best I could do for now. If my operating frequency was lower, using a BJT amplifier would be ideal for me.

[kavkav]

dr-Green,

I have a question about your video regarding the stick with the LEDs lighting up when touching the ground. Did you have it tuned to your operating frequency or was it just straight up turning on when you touched the LEDs to the ground? My assumption is you tuned it based on my understanding on single wire transmission. If not, then this is bad news for efficiency because it would mean anything can collect the energy.

[dR-Green]

Yes I'm finding the whole thing to be quite inefficient too. At the moment I'm using /-12V but during experimenting and adjusting a lot of power is wasted in the power supply/amplifier(s) just to get a fraction of the total input power for use through the intended system. More and more power is wasted for small gains in usable output. Although using a push pull setup and proper balancing I've found it possible to make the transistors run almost cool at full power, any resistors I'm using to limit the current get pretty hot though regardless. If there is any imbalance in the transistors then one will get pretty hot, but it seems possible to get reasonably efficient results with some work on it. The voltage regulators always get hot too and that can't be avoided, I'm surprised they haven't cut out from seeing the primary as a short circuit so far. But the whole thing definitely gives off a lot of heat overall considering I only want it for relatively small amounts of power in the end.

dr-Green,

I have a question about your video regarding the stick with the LEDs lighting up when touching the ground. Did you have it tuned to your operating frequency or was it just straight up turning on when you touched the LEDs to the ground? My assumption is you tuned it based on my understanding on single wire transmission. If not, then this is bad news for efficiency because it would mean anything can collect the energy.

That's an Avramenko Plug



There's no tuning. But note that it works within about 1cm of the earth rod powering 3 LEDs, whereas the tuned receiver is at 30cm powering 6 LEDs.

Note in Tesla's diagram "The Wireless Light: Place a wire in the ground: That is all"

http://www.tuks.nl/wiki/uploads/Main...Earth_pump.jpg

An LED alone won't work in the same way as this anyway. It seems to be incandescent bulbs and such things, I don't know how or why they work but they do. For experiment purposes I'd recommend you use a bucket of garden soil and use it to simulate a wireless earth connection, it can reveal some pretty interesting stuff and can be used to confirm claims and stories etc. I think I did this after watching some Secret Of Nikola Tesla film or something, in it the Tesla character plugged a bulb into the field and it lit. That's easily confirmed with a bucket of soil, the only difference between using the actual earth and a bucket in this way I would say is that it's far easier to get the same effects with low power through the bucket, but otherwise the effect should be just the same with the earth.

Light, The Tesla Way-01 - TMT 72.4 Scale - YouTube

As for efficiency, PEOPLE can certainly collect the energy, but otherwise:

This mode of conveying electrical energy to a distance is not 'wireless' in the popular sense, but a transmission through a conductor, and one which is incomparably more perfect than any artificial one. All impediments of conduction arise from confinement of the electric and magnetic fluxes to narrow channels. The globe is free of such cramping and hinderment. It is an ideal conductor because of its immensity, isolation in space, and geometrical form. Its singleness is only an apparent limitation, for by impressing upon it numerous non-interfering vibrations, the flow of energy may be directed through any number of paths which, though bodily connected, are yet perfectly distinct and separate like ever so many cables. Any apparatus, then, which can be operated through one or more wires, at distances obviously limited, can likewise be worked without artificial conductors, and with the same facility and precision, at distances without limit other than that imposed by the physical dimensions of the globe.

"The Future of the Wireless Art" by Nikola Tesla

[kavkav]

"Yes I'm finding the whole thing to be quite inefficient too. At the moment I'm using /-12V but during experimenting and adjusting a lot of power is wasted in the power supply/amplifier(s) just to get a fraction of the total input power for use through the intended system. More and more power is wasted for small gains in usable output. Although using a push pull setup and proper balancing I've found it possible to make the transistors run almost cool at full power, any resistors I'm using to limit the current get pretty hot though regardless. If there is any imbalance in the transistors then one will get pretty hot, but it seems possible to get reasonably efficient results with some work on it. The voltage regulators always get hot too and that can't be avoided, I'm surprised they haven't cut out from seeing the primary as a short circuit so far. But the whole thing definitely gives off a lot of heat overall considering I only want it for relatively small amounts of power in the end."

I'm not too worried about the amplifier wasting all the energy. I understand it is possible to have efficient high frequency amplifiers. If one day I get rich (and my circuits knowledge has improved), I'll buy one just to do a full scaled experiment. My worry is the efficiency between the transmitting coil to the receiving coil because that is what makes all the magic.

Regarding the wireless light bulb, I have seen that too but I always thought he had a built in coil-receiver tuned to the operating frequency. Otherwise, what is stopping bugs, plants, animals and even humans from getting electrocuted? Now that I've seen your LED circuit, it makes me want to investigate this further. I like your idea and video on a bucket of soil. Before testing it in my backyard I'll try it in a bucket to investigate the different properties and under what conditions the energy can only be received by the receiver coil (if at all possible).

I appreciate all your help, this means a lot. I've found it difficult to find help on this topic.

[kavkav]

Yes I'm finding the whole thing to be quite inefficient too. At the moment I'm using /-12V but during experimenting and adjusting a lot of power is wasted in the power supply/amplifier(s) just to get a fraction of the total input power for use through the intended system. More and more power is wasted for small gains in usable output. Although using a push pull setup and proper balancing I've found it possible to make the transistors run almost cool at full power, any resistors I'm using to limit the current get pretty hot though regardless. If there is any imbalance in the transistors then one will get pretty hot, but it seems possible to get reasonably efficient results with some work on it. The voltage regulators always get hot too and that can't be avoided, I'm surprised they haven't cut out from seeing the primary as a short circuit so far. But the whole thing definitely gives off a lot of heat overall considering I only want it for relatively small amounts of power in the end.



That's an Avramenko Plug



There's no tuning. But note that it works within about 1cm of the earth rod powering 3 LEDs, whereas the tuned receiver is at 30cm powering 6 LEDs.

Note in Tesla's diagram "The Wireless Light: Place a wire in the ground: That is all"



An LED alone won't work in the same way as this anyway. It seems to be incandescent bulbs and such things, I don't know how or why they work but they do. For experiment purposes I'd recommend you use a bucket of garden soil and use it to simulate a wireless earth connection, it can reveal some pretty interesting stuff and can be used to confirm claims and stories etc. I think I did this after watching some Secret Of Nikola Tesla film or something, in it the Tesla character plugged a bulb into the field and it lit. That's easily confirmed with a bucket of soil, the only difference between using the actual earth and a bucket in this way I would say is that it's far easier to get the same effects with low power through the bucket, but otherwise the effect should be just the same with the earth.

Light, The Tesla Way-01 - TMT 72.4 Scale - YouTube

As for efficiency, PEOPLE can certainly collect the energy, but otherwise:



"The Future of the Wireless Art" by Nikola Tesla

In the article you posted Tesla was pretty much saying there is no power loss with the wireless system through the earth. There has to be a way to make this experiment efficient. I'll update this thread with my findings when my experiment is complete.