Significant of short pulsing

[quantumuppercut]

[QUOTE=gyula;121847]NOW what comes is how long pulse time you wish to use for this coil? Probably 3 or 4 times L/R, i.e. 3 or 4 second wide pulse because shorter than this the current may be too low at switch-off for establishing the energy content of the collapsing field. And longer than 4 sec long ON time will not give significantly more 'juice' to the coil's energy content I think.

Hi Gyula,

Thanks for the tutor.

Seems like you don't see the significant of the short pulse or low L/R (say .0001 L/R)pulsing (provide that the ON resistance is ideal (0 Ohm)). The magnetic field in the coil represent the current flow through the coil, right? So If I choose short pulse width (.0001 L/R), it will have a low magnetic field because not alot of amps flow through. But then when you observe the GROWTH curve, the derivative of it at short pulse (or the rate of change of current/magnetic field) is ...almost infinity. What then is the magnetic field rate of change?

QU

[gyula]

Hi QU,

I did not consider a short pulse because it involves much less current entering the coil. And then the energy input to the coil is also small, you surely know this formula E=(L*I*I)/2 which is practically tells you the coils energy content (hence that of the collapsing flux) is proportional to the second power of the current.

Yes, if you have a very quick switch, you may have a quick magnetic field change, no doubt about it. Induced voltage, Vi=L*(dI/dt) can be very high across the coil with a quick switch (30-40 nanosec speed is practical with a driver IC and a power MOSFET). But remember: what you can capture in a capacitor from the the collapsed field, E=(C*V*V)/2, it is a mirror image of the energy you created by launching your current into the coil earlier, it already established the energy content in the coil, and that is the amount that is collapsed.
If you have found that in this process the energy you got is unusually different i.e. higher than what Maxwell equations forecast then I would be very pleased to learn about your results. IT would mean indeed that energy has come into your setup from the environment.
So I am still all ears...

Gyula

[quantumuppercut]

But remember: what you can capture in a capacitor from the the collapsed field, E=(C*V*V)/2, it is a mirror image of the energy you created by launching your current into the coil earlier, it already established the energy content in the coil, and that is the amount that is collapsed.

Gyula

Hi Gyula,

I was expecting for the worst today. I knew it would related to some capacitive coupling or something about Maxwell (hoping to god it's not his quanternion thing or I would have to get back to your answer 30 years later). lol Well, this isn't too bad.

Hm... a mirror image of the energy you put into the coil. A mirror image means the same, which is the same energy content (and very small as you stated), or unity as I stated earlier. Yes, this is exactly what I mean... unity capturing. However, you left yourself an opening. When you energize the coil fully at 5 time constant. You can only get 1/2 of the energy you put in. This contradict your thinking of mirror image. I know you may argue that my method of putting a short pulse and capture unity exist, but it just means that you cannot capture anything from capacitive coupling, else it will be less in recovery. Is that correct?

I know LENZ's law is incorrect and I'm trying to get to that point, but it's hard to find an opening to attack right now.

QU

[gyula]

Hi QU,

I have come back to this topic now that have some time.

I do not get what you mean on capacitive coupling here, I have not written such with respect to your setup so cannot comment your last question.

Also, I did not write the coil is to be energized for 5 time constants I wrote a max of 3 or 4. (See your quote from my text in the very first post of yours above).

And why can you get half of the energy when you use the 5 time constant duration for pulsing?

Let's start with a schematic drawing I made as per your post:
The senario is this. Suppose you have a capacitor of certain amount of energy, a transformer, and 2 extra empty capacitors of the same value. You now send pulses to the transformer under no load and recover the electricity at say 70%. Repeat the senario, but now load the transformer with an empty cap. If you can still recover 70%(not counting the load), would that validate my equation?

See my attachment. On the left you see the capacitor C, charged up with some energy in advance. The two switches are needed to start the process for a duration of a fraction of the L/R time as the ON time for charging up the coil and the empty capacitor (also has C value) then both switches are off, (S2 is needed to prevent this latter C from discharging via the transformer primary coil, i.e prevent to form a parallel LC circuit), and then the collapsing field charges up the third empty capacitor, (it also has C value). Dots at the ends of the coils represent phasing. R means coil wire DC resistance.

Now if you agree with this setup, then we can start discussing it step by step. I think that so far one of us talked about apples while the other meant oranges or vice versa...

Would like to quote also from you:

I agree as the load capacitor charged up, some refelects back to the magnetic field source, but that's pretty much same an unload condition. Even if it is higher, the furnish you need is voltage, not energy.
The most important thing you don't seems to notice or mention is the recovery capacitor. If it recover the same loaded or unload, we have a problem, don't we?

My problem here is you still think a capacitor needs only voltage for charging it up. Unfortunately, a charging current is also involved in this process so input energy is spent!

rgds, Gyula

Hi Gyula,

I was expecting for the worst today. I knew it would related to some capacitive coupling or something about Maxwell (hoping to god it's not his quanternion thing or I would have to get back to your answer 30 years later). lol Well, this isn't too bad.

Hm... a mirror image of the energy you put into the coil. A mirror image means the same, which is the same energy content (and very small as you stated), or unity as I stated earlier. Yes, this is exactly what I mean... unity capturing. However, you left yourself an opening. When you energize the coil fully at 5 time constant. You can only get 1/2 of the energy you put in. This contradict your thinking of mirror image. I know you may argue that my method of putting a short pulse and capture unity exist, but it just means that you cannot capture anything from capacitive coupling, else it will be less in recovery. Is that correct?

I know LENZ's law is incorrect and I'm trying to get to that point, but it's hard to find an opening to attack right now.

QU

[quantumuppercut]

Sigh....

Hi Gyula,

Maybe we'll pick this up later. Right now, I just feel a sudden sadness. It's hard to describe.

QU

[gyula]

Hi QU,

I hope we can continue, my intention is and has been to understand your setup that could validate your interesting formula, especially when you say you have practical results.

Looking forward to learn from you whenever you feel like to do so.

Merry XMAS!

Gyula

[quantumuppercut]

Hi Gyula,

The reason I felt that way because I did not belive that you are the real Gyula. After some times of evaluation, I can see that I'm thinking abit too fast for the situation.

By capacitive coupling, I mean an AV plug. Because the DC pulse input result in a high voltage pulse radiate away from the coil (that's why you cannot capture it by inductive coupling), this radiation cannot be capture by a plain capacitor setup . It has to be AV plug.

What shocking is I didn't know you don't know that when a coil fully charge, max you can recover is 1/2 the energy input. A coil fully charge is 5 time constant, no?

Yes, charging a capacitor involve current input, but the I^2R value go down to zero if you use little current. It eventually becomes pure potential energy transfer.

QU

I'm glad I'm wrong. Merry XMAS

[gyula]

Hi QU,

Ok, the use of Avramenko plug at the input makes things a bit different, then in my schematic the C capacitor in parallel with the input coil via S2 is not needed (nor is S2 itself) of course.
So the input pulse from the input capacitor C goes to the coil and to the AV plug at the same time when S1 is closed. I can accept that by using proper components and thoughtfully chosen pulse times a significant part of the input pulse energy could be recovered in the AV plug.

Had you mentioned how your setup is really looked like... this is what I was asking for a week now?

Yes a coil excited for its 5 L/R time constant is considered already 'fully charged' I have had no problem with it but earlier I wrote a maximum of 3 or 4 time constant for the on time and interrupt the current then, this was back even in the other thread, and your "now load the transformer with an empty cap" statement meant for me you connect a capacitor C in parallel with the coil. Had you mentioned AV plug back then, I did not get sidetracked...

Hopefully one day you show your results in practice and justify your formula.

rgds, Gyula

[sebosfato]

What about energizing the coil during the attraction and when the magnet passes that point, you just open the coil, as to concentrate the pulse collapse, to give a punch all in once. All the energy in the coil would become instant force discharge. An intense electromagnetic pulse.

[quantumuppercut]

Hi QU,

Ok, the use of Avramenko plug at the input makes things a bit different, then in my schematic the C capacitor in parallel with the input coil via S2 is not needed (nor is S2 itself) of course.
So the input pulse from the input capacitor C goes to the coil and to the AV plug at the same time when S1 is closed. I can accept that by using proper components and thoughtfully chosen pulse times a significant part of the input pulse energy could be recovered in the AV plug.

Had you mentioned how your setup is really looked like... this is what I was asking for a week now?

Yes a coil excited for its 5 L/R time constant is considered already 'fully charged' I have had no problem with it but earlier I wrote a maximum of 3 or 4 time constant for the on time and interrupt the current then, this was back even in the other thread, and your "now load the transformer with an empty cap" statement meant for me you connect a capacitor C in parallel with the coil. Had you mentioned AV plug back then, I did not get sidetracked...

Hopefully one day you show your results in practice and justify your formula.

rgds, Gyula

Hi Gyula,

Ah... I see now. What I see simple doesn't mean it's the same for others. I have draw up my diagram. You can adjust it as you see fit. I think you have more experience with set up that's why I didn't say much.

QU

[gyula]

Hi QU,

Thanks for the drawing. So this is what you proved your formula with? If yes, what COP have you got, I wonder. It is good that DC voltages are collected and these can be measured easily with a DMM. And the switching circuit can also be made to consume in the some mW range.

rgds, Gyula

[quantumuppercut]

Hi QU,

Thanks for the drawing. So this is what you proved your formula with? If yes, what COP have you got, I wonder. It is good that DC voltages are collected and these can be measured easily with a DMM. And the switching circuit can also be made to consume in the some mW range.

rgds, Gyula

Hi Gyula,

I formulate my equation with similar set up. The circuit I gave you is the most up to date with my theory. I have never measured COP. My concentration is to observe the trend and analyze it. I observe that the faster you pulse it, the more it doesn't care if you load it or unloaded. Along with my knowledge of thermodynamics, I formulate my equation. Of course this is not the only experiment. I've also observed various experiments like the Anslie's and Stiffler's by various generious experimenters that take their time to show their results on youtube. It has comes a long way. I do not have the knowledge and equipments to do this myself, and frankly, I don't know who to turn to... but I believe one day I will find my engineer.

QU