Eccentric Transformer Theory -

[ewizard]

Big for this thread - some incredible info here. Thanks Armagdn03 ! I've always felt understanding the universal nature of the toroid is a key.

[Armagdn03]

You are very welcome.

Here is some additional information that may be of use.

One need not have a coil next to a coil. One can also rotate a coil with respect to another coil. This in essense modifies what is known as the flux linkage between the two coils. For example, if you have a magnetic field perpendicular to an inductor or coil, you will have a 1:1 linkage, meaning all flux possible will pass through your coil.

If you have a 45 degree angle between your inductor and your magneitc fieild, you take the cosine of the angle, and get 0.707. This in essense means that only 70.7% of the flux actually interacts with the inductor.

The equation that describes this is....Flux = A x B cos a

As you can see from our faradays law equation from my first post...

The standard transformer According to Faraday's law (put in this convenient permutation)

Voltage Generated = (-N)(delta (BA))/delta t)
the "(-N)(delta (BA))" basically describes the same thing as the inductance of the coil. In fact we can substitute in our equation for flux linkage above into this part of the equation to get

Voltage Generated = (-N)(delta (BA cos a ))/delta t)

The insertion of the (cosine a) describes the voltage generated on our inductor as we rotate it with respect to the magnetic field

Therefore if we have a primary coil which is at an angle to a secondary coil, we have in essense wound them around two seperate centers, and in doing so have created space inbetween them, and they are for lack of a better term eccentric.

This is very interesting because many many problems are had using "Tesla coil" setups, this gives a practical way to build using the magnetic side of the spectrum rather than the electric, which has more problems than you can count.

Which brings me to another point, one cannot really use the setup I showed earlier with the capacitive end of the transformer action. If you fill a capacitive source like a capacitor bank with the output of such a device you are already throwing away half your joules of energy, this is known, to fill one capacitive element with another depleats energy, you would already be at a loss, yet this is how all attempts are made to use this, thus what I showed was only a practical demonstration to show the subtraction in Peak to peak voltage, equating to a direct loss in energy. To really make this thing work, I would not use the capacitive end of things.

[SuperCaviTationIstic]

I've read lots and lots and lots of Tesla. In many of his experiments he uses single turn primaries, sometimes of very wide cross section.

He attributes some of the effects on the secondaries (weather they were coils, or gasses, or vacuums) to electrostatic induction.

He also said that while the radio group of guys was wasting like 90 percent of their energy in magnetic fields, he was using electric fields in his coil transmissions.

What i'm thinking, is that electrostatic induction is more efficient than electromagnetic induction.

Don smith used grounding between the ends of his secondary, usually at a 3 point spark gap. What if he was using electrostatic induction to pump electrons back and forth from the ground connection, while drawing power off. He even said in many things that resonance had nothing to do with it.

I watched this video on electrostatic induction, and it really got me thinking YouTube - electrostatic induction
At the end it shows how 1 charged rod could charge an unlimited number of electroscopes and cause them to retain their charge/dipolarity if grounding was used and the charged rod never loses its charge.

An object with a given potential is used to induce an equal and opposite potential in a second object, without destroying the potential of the first. Related to not killing the dipole perhaps?

[rave154]

intersting video on "electrostatic induction", how to charge an object with another object, without discharging(destroying the dipole) of the first object......utilising the ground(earth)......makes a lot of sense.

[sebosfato]

intersting video on "electrostatic induction", how to charge an object with another object, without discharging(destroying the dipole) of the first object......utilising the ground(earth)......makes a lot of sense.

That would be great way to generate energy, except by the fact that you still need to do work when you move the (charged rod) to another discharged one (work because of the attraction force caused by the difference between the different charges between the "electroscope aka capacitor" and the charged rod)

[Armagdn03]

That would be great way to generate energy, except by the fact that you still need to do work when you move the (charged rod) to another discharged one (work because of the attraction force caused by the difference between the different charges between the "electroscope aka capacitor" and the charged rod)

This is not exactly true if you think the problem out....For example:


Imagine a Globe, acting as a capacitance, charged so that it has 16 units of field (negative) at its surface. at radius 2r another globe will feel an average of 4 units of charge (negative) at its surface, and through electrostatic induction will want to charge itself to an equal and opposite charge of 4 (positive).

Note:to charge the second orb at 4 positive, it must have a path to allow this charging, so we will ground it.

Now we have a primary orb at -16, a secondary orb at +4.

We can now discharge the primary orb. The best place to discharge it would be into an inductor (which means we have a capacitance and an inductance, creating an LC circuit) the inductance will absorb all available charge that the primary is willing to give up.

At this point we discharge the primary orb, but it cannot let go of all 16 units of charge...mainly because it too is siting in the field created by the secondary orb at +4. The secondary orb has a surface charge of +4, and at a distance, where the primary orb sits, the primary only feels an average field of +1, again because of the inverse squared law.

This means that our primary orb may only return 15 units for cyclic recycling with the inductor we have attatched.

We have used 16 units to create 4 through electrostatic induction. Then we recycle 15 of these units for cyclic interchange within a resonant LC circuit. So since 15 of the 16 are recycled for use over and over, we have only really spent 1. Spend 1, to create 4.

So in essense you are correct, you must do work, but both in theory, practice, and math, the ammount of work done is a nice geometric ratio, with primary concern falling at doublings of the radii.

I use the 2r raddi alot because it makes a very interesting situation where the input is squared.

[Raui]

Armagdn,
I don't think you're right in your thinking of the Tesla coil and I tend to agree with supercavitationistic, the electrostatic induction factor plays a lot bigger role than magnetic induction. The aim of a Tesla coil is to create a huge displacement current which is an electrostatic phenomenon. The electrostatic part of this device isn't well understood by most, infact the whole electrostatic phenomenon is not well understood, but this doesn't mean that it doesn't play a vital role. Infact the very design of the Tesla transformer is to try and suppress the magnetic induction factor (coils at 90 degrees to each other) not embrace it. This design lets the electrostatic phenomenon to make themselves better seen because the field is at 90 degrees to the surface of the primary continuing until they hit another conductor which is electrostatic induction which is what Tesla has said is the phenomena behind a Tesla coil.

For further reading I suggest you look for a copy of Condensed Intro into Tesla Transformers written by Eric Dollard which has a great deal of information on this subject.

Raui

[SuperCaviTationIstic]

J Naudin has a page up about eccentric transformers 2SGen, an amazing tiny Solid State Generator by JL Naudin

Also, Peter T. Markovich & ATREE...... looks like it may be related with the spiral coil perpendicular to the solenoid coil
Peter Markovich: Apparatus To Rectify Ether Energy (ATREE)

[sebosfato]

Hi armagdn

This could be a good idea to discharge the "rod" before moves it but however than it would get reversely charged also by induction by the electrode that got charged before. However maybe in resonance we could have it repelling somehow...

However this is a nice idea and could be worked out. Is would be a kind of wimshurst generator working in resonance ac.

Regards

[Armagdn03]

Armagdn,
I don't think you're right in your thinking of the Tesla coil and I tend to agree with supercavitationistic, the electrostatic induction factor plays a lot bigger role than magnetic induction. The aim of a Tesla coil is to create a huge displacement current which is an electrostatic phenomenon. The electrostatic part of this device isn't well understood by most, infact the whole electrostatic phenomenon is not well understood, but this doesn't mean that it doesn't play a vital role. Infact the very design of the Tesla transformer is to try and suppress the magnetic induction factor (coils at 90 degrees to each other) not embrace it. This design lets the electrostatic phenomenon to make themselves better seen because the field is at 90 degrees to the surface of the primary continuing until they hit another conductor which is electrostatic induction which is what Tesla has said is the phenomena behind a Tesla coil.

For further reading I suggest you look for a copy of Condensed Intro into Tesla Transformers written by Eric Dollard which has a great deal of information on this subject.

Raui

I own and have read all of eric dollards books, I have also read all available tesla material.

I am not trying to do what tesla did.

I have worked very hard at documenting and observing all effects possible with this phenomenon, and what I post is not speculation or guesses, but based off of bench time, observation, and careful consideration.

[Armagdn03]

Hi armagdn

This could be a good idea to discharge the "rod" before moves it but however than it would get reversely charged also by induction by the electrode that got charged before. However maybe in resonance we could have it repelling somehow...

However this is a nice idea and could be worked out. Is would be a kind of wimshurst generator working in resonance ac.

Regards

This actually is worked out, the reverse charge is what I have refered to as a "lenz like effect" and I have described it well, this is the very reason for the subtraction of the 1 from the origional 15 units, please re-read the information, you are close but dont quite get what I am going for yet.

Thanks for posting!

[sebosfato]

Hi armagdn

Yes that seems very good idea, hope it works, we would need to create a very carefully designed generator for this to work, do you have already any drawings or more info about? What about creating a new thread electrostatic resonant generator?

I guess this is related ELECTROSTATIC GENERATOR - Google Patent Search

Best Regards

[Armagdn03]

Hi armagdn

Yes that seems very good idea, hope it works, we would need to create a very carefully designed generator for this to work, do you have already any drawings or more info about? What about creating a new thread electrostatic resonant generator?

I guess this is related ELECTROSTATIC GENERATOR - Google Patent Search

Best Regards

you are correct, careful is key, and....like I said earlier......


"Which brings me to another point, one cannot really use the setup I showed earlier with the capacitive end of the transformer action. If you fill a capacitive source like a capacitor bank with the output of such a device you are already throwing away half your joules of energy, this is known, to fill one capacitive element with another depleats energy, you would already be at a loss, yet this is how all attempts are made to use this, thus what I showed was only a practical demonstration to show the subtraction in Peak to peak voltage, equating to a direct loss in energy. To really make this thing work, I would not use the capacitive end of things."

[mk1]

I wanted to show off my own Eccentric transformer ...

It will be used for tpu and joule thief experiments .

Mark

[Armagdn03]

@ MK1

Just today I was going to start going through train of thought that would lead one to a build which is very similar to your own.

That is B-E-A-UTIFUL work!

Since you already know what you are doing, and others may ask, how is that an eccentric transformer...Let me explain.....

If you were to have two coils, each wrapped 90 degrees apart around a toroidal form, so that one went around the circumference, and the other wrapped around the toroid, going from center out over and over.... You have essentially have two coils occupying the same space, yet living in different worlds. One will not affect the other due to their 90 degree variation.

However you may angle the second coil, so that it is at a slant. There are two ways of doing this. One of which you showed beautifully here.

Because you have angled the secondary (or maybe primary??? could be either) <90 degrees, you have some degree of coupling.

So,

Knowing that our primary creates a field which can be measured in amp turns "X" we know that the secondary will feel only a portion of this. This is calculated using the "flux linkage equation"

Flux = B*A cos (angle)

this can be substituted into the faradays law equation for the secondary to know how much EMF it will create.

Here is the standard equation:

Voltage Generated = (-N)(delta (BA))/delta t)

Where we have replaced the unit of inductance with its terms:
-N = number of turns
B = Magnetic field strength in Tesla
A = Area of turns

And now we will insert the flux linkage portion...

Voltage Generated = (-N)(delta (BA)Cos(angle))/delta t)

Where we have replaced the unit of inductance with its terms:
-N = number of turns
B = Magnetic field strength in Tesla
A = Area of turns
Cos = Cosine of the angle between windings

Now we have eccentricity. The secondary feels a portion of the flux, therefore creates only a portion of the EMF, the BEMF will also have to go through the same mechanism and there will be an energy difference.

Once again, fantastic job!

There are huge advantages to do this on the magnetic rather than the electric side of the spectrum as I showed in the simple demos. I alluded to this over a few times but you really caught on!

For example, if your output is capacitive, and you want to fill storage capacitors with it, you are automatically throwing away half your energy!

If though....you have an inductive output, it will discharge 100% (or close) of its energy into a capacitive storage unit if you pay attention to all variables such as time constants etc. This really is why the route you chose is much better for practice, but not as simple for demonstration.

Soon I will be posting two new variations on the eccentric transformer in a new but related thread....Glad to see your work!

Coming soon.... The Missing "Fundamental" generator
And the Degaussing Generator