This is it !

[Allcanadian]

@gmeast

I have just never run across anything about Tesla that actually said or hinted at free energy being a goal of any of his research or inventions.

Here is a good link to Tesla's lecture on -- "The problem of increasing Human Energy", "The Problem of Increasing Human Energy" by Nikola Tesla. When I started researching the work of Nikola Tesla over ten years ago I stumbled on to this lecture and it became clear that Tesla's goal from the very beginning was what we call "free energy". However Tesla did not call it free energy, he was looking for a tangible source of energy which had very specific qualities. That is the source must be inexhaustable(never run out), it must be available everywhere and have a high power density.
This is where the mystery and a great deal of misunderstanding begin as both Tesla and T.H.Moray both refer to the source of energy as Cosmic Rays but this is not the energy they utilized, it is the "source" of the form of energy they utilized. Cosmic Rays and other forms of radiation(Radiant Energy) shower down everywhere on this planet day and night and this radiation charges all forms of matter with the real form of energy both Tesla and Moray utilized, which is what we call "static electricity",lol.
Regards
AC

[cikljamas]

take it all away and test the cop by charging a cap with just the primary on the desufator.

How do you mean it exactly ?

I spent today few hours trying something similar, i connected secondary
of 220/12 0 12 transformer in parallel with desulfators L1 (200-500 uH)
and then put FWBR across primary of the transformer, so i gained like
this about 250-300 V but when i try to use these 250-300 DC i notice
more draining of the source battery and that is the case with all circuits
that i tried until now , sometimes it is Lenz law, sometimes is maybe
something else but it is very, very frustrating not to be able to use that
excess of energy without increasing source draining which annihilate
any possible benefit of that "seems to be excess energy" !!!

That is why i found very interesting your next words :

Anyway everything we gather from the secondary output does not affect the input. Loaded or not. well it looks that way to me.

Does it just look that way to you, or you tested it more than once to be
sure that you are able to repeat your measurements ?

In next few hours i will try finally to replicate your circuit...
But if anything went wrong it could be in relation with connections between
primary and circuit, could you confirm that primary should be connected
in parallel with desulfators L1 (200-500) coil, or some other way ?

Cheers !

[gmeast]

mosfet 540Z

I received my HexFets ... IRF540Z. They are better than the logic-level mosfets I was using, but I received good training with those. The only issue I have is that the gate driver circuits we've been looking at just fry the 540Z's. My original 'divider-network/offset' 'simple circuit' still works the best.

So here is my latest scope capture. It's really not a bad power pulse. I'm pulsing the primary of a transformer with a Si-Iron lam core.

The pulse width is 1.52usec
The frequency is 80thousand Hz (80kHz) ... that's cookin' man
The rise time is 120nanoseconds ... this is when the pulse just turned 'OFF'
The fall time is 200nanoseconds ... this is when the pulse just turned 'ON'

http://02d1852.netsolhost.com/radian...orig-drvr0.JPG

I will undoubtedly get great results from my new toroid once I finish it (hum, hum ... start it).

Later

[cikljamas]

I made it, and there is some resonant effect indeed, but these values
are so low that i just do not see the point of all this...

I think that i just need much,much more electronic theoretical knowledge
to be able to play with these stuffs with sense of purpose...
Otherwise it is hopeless, and of course i have to obtain some equipment...

Without fulfilling these two conditions i can only replicate what others
who have knowledge and equipment are willing to offer to suckers who
have delusions of competence...

Having good will and readiness to achieve goals of realizing some fantastic ideas are just not good enough, and as sooner i admit this to myself as
better for me !

Well, i am going to enjoy in your enthusiasm, and in the meantime
i am going to solder electronic components making already finished and tested projects, and try to improve my knowledge from books, and one
day maybe something happen and we just find again land over the
rainbow that some guys already found but some other guys do not allow
us to enjoy beautiful fruits of that eden unless we make another one
all by ourselves...

But, if i think harder, this is the best thing in whole this story, to discover
and develop things from the beginning, where is the challenge if we have
everything offered on the plate ?

And i know Greg does agree with me ! And Farmhand too !

Cheers !

[Farmhand]

I received my HexFets ... IRF540Z. They are better than the logic-level mosfets I was using, but I received good training with those. The only issue I have is that the gate driver circuits we've been looking at just fry the 540Z's. My original 'divider-network/offset' 'simple circuit' still works the best.

So here is my latest scope capture. It's really not a bad power pulse. I'm pulsing the primary of a transformer with a Si-Iron lam core.

The pulse width is 1.52usec
The frequency is 80thousand Hz (80kHz) ... that's cookin' man
The rise time is 120nanoseconds ... this is when the pulse just turned 'OFF'
The fall time is 200nanoseconds ... this is when the pulse just turned 'ON'

http://02d1852.netsolhost.com/radian...orig-drvr0.JPG

I will undoubtedly get great results from my new toroid once I finish it (hum, hum ... start it).

Later

Hi Gmeast, that is definately rattling the battery a bit, 80khz is plenty frequent enough to get some good effects, that is impressive, I havent been able to get the desufator circuit that high. I'm postponing the building of the op-amp circuit incase you come up with an update, but I think I will put one together on a solderless board tonight.

Now my wire is on the way I need to get transformer tape, jaycar in town don't sell it, and the online shop I usually use don't have it either, seems crazy that I need to search for hours to find some tape to buy.

My testing with this other setup indicates to me that it is impossible to know what will happen untill we experiment.

I think I realise now where I went wrong with my calculations. I need to divide the output in watts by the seconds.

So that is 93 millijoules per second and by my calculation the input is power is .475 watts continuously with 12.5v @ 38 Ma, is it even possible to work it out. Without actually drawing off the amount to be measured in smoothed DC and measuring that ? All these numbers just bounce around in my head like a bullet in a beer keg.

I think I at least need to learn how to work these numbers correctly for future testing, as i've said before, I don't like testing, mainly because I can test all I like but if I don't know how to use the numbers, there is no point. I actually prefer to just see how things work and I can tell if they are good or not.

I'll do some more tests today, the new primary seems to work different, much more secondary output. But all I can do is make the measurements, I give up on crunching numbers by formula. I can't make my brain work like that.

cikljamas

How do you mean it exactly ?

I spent today few hours trying something similar, i connected secondary
of 220/12 0 12 transformer in parallel with desulfators L1 (200-500 uH)
and then put FWBR across primary of the transformer, so i gained like
this about 250-300 V but when i try to use these 250-300 DC i notice
more draining of the source battery and that is the case with all circuits
that i tried until now , sometimes it is Lenz law, sometimes is maybe
something else but it is very, very frustrating not to be able to use that
excess of energy without increasing source draining which annihilate
any possible benefit of that "seems to be excess energy" !!!

Yes of course if you use the secondary of a regular transformer it will cause more input draw. But with resonate induction that is not the case. You need to look closer at the drawing and the picture i posted.

http://9xgamg.bay.livefilestore.com/...001.JPG?psid=1

The loop coil replaces the exsisting coil.
You can see in this picture that the loop coil connected to the desulfator circuit is all that is needed for basic function, all the rest can be removed and nothing changes for the recovery output to charging battery, I haven't done hardly any testing so I really don't know but I think it is worth some investigation as a usefull device.

I share anything I find that I think is wothy of investigation immediately.
Or as soon as I can understand it enough or at least think i do. But I do know one thing, and that is I am not going to hastily build lots of circuits and test them for EM in/out efficiency and declare them inefficient. This is definately not my goal.

It's easy enough to measure the input but, the output currentless energy will not be meased as current. It has to be converted to be measured. Or measured in caps. Radiant circuits produce currentless electricity and it is usually mixed with the EM electricity, the circuit with the loop coil and secondary to shunt caps to step down transformer to recitifier produces almost pure radiant energy (currentless) you can use it to light leds but cannot measure any current, when normally I can measure 10Ma 20Ma or so, With this energy I measure Zero Ma and yet the led glows very brightly.

I am learning a lot, at the moment that is my main goal, to learn as much as I can.
Cheers

[Farmhand]

Well cikljamas

I just thought I would check again to make sure I wasn't seeing things.

And. With the circuit consuming 183 Ma the air core secondary shows 90VAC and when I short it dead, the input does not change, not one bit. It doesn't even flinch. I can light leds with it (further down the line) same thing, no change.

It may affect the charge rate of the second battery however, I haven't even worked out how to test that yet but I think caps will be involved, and one thing I can calculate is ( less and more ) I can see that. So to test that I should put the recovery output to cap and measure with the secondary output open then again shorted. Easy, I only need to see which is higher and quicker.

Cheers


EDIT for cikljamas

Well, i am going to enjoy in your enthusiasm, and in the meantime
i am going to solder electronic components making already finished and tested projects, and try to improve my knowledge from books, and one
day maybe something happen and we just find again land over the
rainbow that some guys already found but some other guys do not allow
us to enjoy beautiful fruits of that eden unless we make another one
all by ourselves...

But, if i think harder, this is the best thing in whole this story, to discover
and develop things from the beginning, where is the challenge if we have
everything offered on the plate ?

Try not to get frustrated or anything, by a lack of equipment. Things may change in that area, and anyway you can still build stuff and experiment.

Gmeast and 7imix are right we need to find a way to get you a scope. Do you look in the classifieds and stuff, sometimes a garage sale or similar can be a treasure trove, but getting stuff like that is mostly good luck.

I got my analogue scope from ebay for $80.00 I thought it was a good deal. The trick with Ebay is you have to wait without bidding till the final 50 seconds or so then bid how much you are willing, then no one has a chance to outbid you. Most of time it works too. I have it down pat.

[gmeast]

tape

Hi Gmeast, that is definately rattling the battery a bit, 80khz is plenty frequent enough to get some good effects, that is impressive, I havent been able to get the desufator circuit that high. I'm postponing the building of the op-amp circuit incase you come up with an update, but I think I will put one together on a solderless board tonight.

Now my wire is on the way I need to get transformer tape, jaycar in town don't sell it, and the online shop I usually use don't have it either, seems crazy that I need to search for hours to find some tape to buy.

.................................................. ..........
.................................................. ..........

Hi Farmhand,

What's funny is that the OP-Amp PWM has never given me a lick of trouble ... it only got better as I swapped out the Quad Op-Amps for successively faster ones (higher slew rates).

I just ordered all of the parts for the digital PWM module research. I also bought a solderless protoboard just for that project. Since I 'confidently' fried 2ea. IRF540Z's trying to make the complimentary transistor gate driver work, I ordered more of those to fry ... oh goodie! I'll also use the protoboard for some of the gate driver R&d as well 'cause it's faster ... then migrate the design to a soldered 'bird's nest'. So I suggest you play with the OP-Amp PWM, cause the digital module research will likely take a while. I haven't had time to draw the schematics for some important improvements to the Op-Amp PWM, but again they only pertain to the pot values and not much else except maybe to use another low power quad op-amp ($0.39) as a buffer so all of the pots can be 100K. This will lower the overhead (power draw) of the PWM circuit. One such place is the centertap between the two 8.2K resistors (10K in the pdf I originally posted). These could be a precision voltage reference or a 'two 100k resistor node' followed by an OP-Amp buffer or a 'real' low powered linear buffer .... oops! well there ya' go ... there are the improvements.

Interesting note: I was able to drive the 540Z's right off because I could adjust the gate driver amplitude AND DC offset. The scope capture you saw in my post (80kHz x 1.5usec) was (and still is) with a gate driver PWM amplitude of only 4.5V ... for a Mosfet at 12.75VDC - 13VDC on the rails???. The pulse is fairly well squared off for that Hz. So obviously I don't actually know s*h*i*t about driving mosfets 'cause I don't know why what I have works so well. Is there a best way to drive these things or am I doing OK?

I am still thinking of buying some 1" of the yellow mylar tape spec'd by Bob Boyce (1P802 ... yellow OR black).

Someone gave me this link here:
Lodestone Pacific

Later

[7imix]

Try not to get frustrated or anything, by a lack of equipment. Things may change in that area, and anyway you can still build stuff and experiment.

Gmeast and 7imix are right we need to find a way to get you a scope. Do you look in the classifieds and stuff, sometimes a garage sale or similar can be a treasure trove, but getting stuff like that is mostly good luck.

I got my analogue scope from ebay for $80.00 I thought it was a good deal. The trick with Ebay is you have to wait without bidding till the final 50 seconds or so then bid how much you are willing, then no one has a chance to outbid you. Most of time it works too. I have it down pat.

Farmhand your scope is pretty nice. Sounds like a great deal. Your scope is 5mhz, and the dso nano only has a sampling rate of 1mhz so I think that only gives it a bandwidth of 500khz. Of course things are a lot harder to measure on an analog scope. I'm going to get an analog scope cause it will be cheaper to find the speed I need.

When you get the nano you should make a bnc to 1/8th adapter like I did. I got a $20 scope probe that has a 10x switch so now I can measure a kilovolt on the nano.

[Farmhand]

Hi Greg, That all sounds good to me, i'll use the PDF you posted and go on to that, I hope I can get it to work first go. I get paranoid when I first energise a circuit. Anyway when I do get it to work i'll try to verify what your saying about the driver setup. I have a feeling the op-amp setup will work a bit different to the CMOS setup, so I am very curious to see how and where, if i can work it out that is.

Maybe a PMH is what I see when I look at a Testatika machine's conversion arrangement, two of them, hmmm. I have to make one of those to test its conversion.

Here's a wavy wave from Mr Desufator, he's charging two batteries now, the second charge battery is connected directly to the rectified final secondary output 20VDC open, and it charges. When I do it like that the recovery waveform gets a bit wavier. Like this.

http://9xgamg.bay.livefilestore.com/...003.JPG?psid=1

Freaky stuff.
Cheers

Interesting video YouTube - Testatika Machine

[gmeast]

Hi Greg, That all sounds good to me, i'll use the PDF you posted and go on to that, I hope I can get it to work first go. I get paranoid when I first energise a circuit. Anyway when I do get it to work i'll try to verify what your saying about the driver setup. I have a feeling the op-amp setup will work a bit different to the CMOS setup, so I am very curious to see how and where, if i can work it out that is.
.................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .....................
Freaky stuff.
Cheers

Hi Farmhand,

When you say CMOS setup, are you talking 555 stuff? Anyway, the 540Z I'm using now only apparently needs only a 4.5V gate amplitude for a 13VDC rail-rail???? So be careful. You will probably need to add the offset circuit I used on mine ... see my schematic or set up that last Op-Amp your own way to control the amplitude of the gate charge ... something I don't quite yet fully understand about power Mosfets. Please steer me to your pulser circuit and driver you're using in the desulfator ... I know you've posted them many times, and I likely downloaded them, but failed to properly name the files for later reference.

Good luck. Later

[Farmhand]

Drawing

Here it is, http://9xhe3g.bay.livefilestore.com/...tor.jpg?psid=1

Very sorry nearly forgot this bit, the top part of the second drawing is the pulse generator section that is common to both devices the bottom device in the second drawing is a self desulfator, the top drawing is a variation of the bottom one,( I use the top one ). Pwew. And I also hope that makes sense, I managed to confuse others by this, I can see how it could be confusing.

http://9xhe3g.bay.livefilestore.com/...tor.jpg?psid=1

It's fairly simple but the circuit overrides the chip sometimes if the correct coil and cap aren't used, the little cap in the timer part I am using now is 10 times bigger than the drawing, it says .001 I use .01.

I have found the twitch problem it is a bad connection I have to fix it. Later. The other one is fine, if I use the smaller cap I can get the higher frequencies. It'll be good to try a different sstup with the same coils, just to see what happens.

About the gate charge, some fets have more input capacitance than others so would take more charging I guess, and I think some fets if high amperage particularly would not get warm even if they only open halfway, as long as only half the rated current is trying to pass through them. If the gate charge is effectively grounded very little power needs to be dissapated in any resistors connected to the gate or the gate it self. Wouldn't the capacitance of the gate convert the voltage and discharge it with current = heat, I was thinking about that the other day, a normal capacitor would, but maybe it's only electrolytic that do that. However the base of the pnp transistor is taking current to work as well I imagine how and where does that get dissipated ?

If you look in the PG50 datasheet at the gate charge Diagram it looks to me as if the threshold value of 2 to 4 volts is when the gate starts to trigger and when it hits 10 v it is fully "on" much heat is created if there is a lot of current wanting to flow and the fet takes to long to get fully on and fully off.

I like to think of it like a slide gate on a large water pipe under pressure, when it's fully open the output is a clean cylinder of water, but halfway open it sprays all over the place, if it is opened and shut quick enough the water coming out would be nice neat chopped up cylinders, and very little spray or waste or in our case heat, not wet.

Anyway thats how i think of it, like a big dam gate as it is opening the water sprays a lot.


7imix.

Thanks for the heads up on the scope probe I noticed yours in one of your vids and was meaning to ask you about it, i've got a couple of probe's but only one 10x.

Cheers

[Farmhand]

http://public.bay.livefilestore.com/...la4.gif?psid=1

The way I see it if you take the secondary coil out of the drawing above with the attached lights. Then whats left is labeled

A external power source,

C,D,E,F, are all parts of the swithing controller or the MOSFET and timer/driver,

K and K are two halve's of the primary coil, H is the big cap which is effectively accross the switch,

B and B are choke's

and A' and A' are conductors.

Haha and I just worked out the parts of A' and A' that extend upwards in the drawing are the recoveries.

Well thats what it looks like to me.

Edit.....

on second thought the recovery should go where F is maybe, our switch would be on the negative side of A" and the recovery would also be there.

This drawing of tesla's the switch cuts the primary in two halves, which is different.

Cheers

[Farmhand]

http://public.bay.livefilestore.com/...la4.gif?psid=1
Then this drawing below tells me I should use the device in the drawing above (but modernised) and just remove the lights only, then add some shunt caps to the secondary and pulse the primary of the Tesla coil with that, like in the drawing below. I can only imagine what come's off the ends of that secodary would do.


http://public.bay.livefilestore.com/...oil.jpg?psid=1


Looks like a lot of fun and if the output of the final Tesla coil secondary can be converted it would be significant, if it was done right.

We would hope that is.

Edit...

Oh and the beuty of the mechanical switching is that it would be very difficult for the circuit to override the controller. Better stability and also quite high input voltages could be used.

I wonder if the switching controller can be replaced by a spark gap.

Cheers

[Farmhand]

Gmeast, Am I seeing this right? Are these chips basically the same thing ?

The (CMOS Quad 2 input NOR Gate) "CD4001" chip looks like almost the same thing as the (Quad Op-Amp) "RC4136" chip, very similar looking, when I look at the schematics of them one is all MOSFETS and the other is all regular Transistors inside them, I have no idea what i'm looking at when I look at the chip internal schematics but it is interesting.

Anyway are they just similar things ?


With your drawing.

What would happen if I took away all the offset voltage stuff and connected what I needed to to get an output?

Like remove the three 2k resistors and the 100k pot what would I need to connect together to get an output ?

And how high would that be?

Sorry about the questions but the answers will help me understand better.

Cheers

[gmeast]

Gmeast, Am I seeing this right? Are these chips basically the same thing ?

The (CMOS Quad 2 input NOR Gate) "CD4001" chip looks like almost the same thing as the (Quad Op-Amp) "RC4136" chip, very similar looking, when I look at the schematics of them one is all MOSFETS and the other is all regular Transistors inside them, I have no idea what i'm looking at when I look at the chip internal schematics but it is interesting.

Anyway are they just similar things ?


With your drawing.

What would happen if I took away all the offset voltage stuff and connected what I needed to to get an output?

Like remove the three 2k resistors and the 100k pot what would I need to connect together to get an output ?

And how high would that be?

Sorry about the questions but the answers will help me understand better.

Cheers

The 4001 is a 4ea 2-condition NOR logic gate chip. The NOR , OR, AND, NAND gate symbols are all Triangle-Looking things. The RC136 is a quad OP-Amp having a slightly different pinout than the quad I am using (tle2074).

They are just similar (looking) things. The 4001 is a digital logic gate array and the 136 is a linear amplifier array.

If you do NOT use the fourth Op-Amp as a summing amplifier to offset and/or control the amplitude of the PWM output of the comparator stage (called U1C in the original MAXIM PWM pdf I posted here) the pulse may be too big ... don't know for sure though ... one careful test will tell. I needed to do that because of the logic-level fet I was using. Otherwise the output swings practically full (rail-to-rail power supply).

My PWM has been at high Hz and short PW for three days now and the battery is staying pinned at 12.76VDC - 12.75VDC which means I am generating whatever power the circuit is consuming OR (and I hope not) I'm simply using the battery as fast as the battery quiesces.

Later