My Motors got me to Tap into Radiant Energy

[JohnStone]

@JohnStone, is your sample circuit correct? Shouldn't U3,U4 be identical connected as U1, U2?

1.
Thanks you're right. I corrected the schematic.

2.
Pondering about the driver capabilities of NE555 - just another idea for driving FETs faster and cheap.
The 555 circuit can be used as voltage comparator / driver. The discharge pin can be used in order to add sink current. So we have 200mA source / 300mA sink. An additional pullup resistor can be used inorder to add source current. Value needs to be determined in order to get symmetrical switching at FET side.
You can play additionaly with a resistor (to GND) at pin 5 in order to adjust the threshold voltage.

sample schematic

Please note the different data:
NE555 / LM555
source 200mA / sink 200mA / discharge 100mA / 200ns switch time

vs.

CMOS TLC555 / LMC555
source 10mA / sink 100mA / discharge 100mA / 20nS switch time
The pullup is a MUST inorder to add current to the source driver!

I would recommend to add an individual 555 to every FET placed near to the gate pin.

[prochiro]

Pulser

Hi all
For those who are struggling with the frequency generators, go here
RMCybernetics - DIY Homemade Signal Generator with Pulse Width Modulation
This site has some 14 pages of interesting information on how to modify the thing to achive many types of goals. I suggest you read them all and save as a PDF.
The other site is a motor control with the irf740 and will also control mosfets.
RMCybernetics - DIY Homemade Power Pulse Controller
This site also has much information although the basic circuit is the same.
If you have questions, you will find the answer in one of these sites. When done reading, you will be an expert.
Dana

[ZeropointEnergy]

LM339 Circuit is Bobs/Mad Scientist

Exactly which circuit diagram are you using or did you try all of them? Tell me which post the circuit appears in. Are you absolutely sure you replicated the circuit/s correctly and didn't make any change because you didn't have a certain component? What kind and size of capacitor are you using?


How and where are you measuring the current?


The reference voltage for the oscillator circuit in these diagrams are set by the 100K resistors on pin5 and isn't adjustable.

This would indicate your cap isn't working for some reason.

This is how it should work:
The current enters the oscillator circuit through the feed back resistors to the neg. pin of the comparator and causes the cap (also connected to the neg pin) to charge... when the cap charges to more than the reference voltage the comparator output drops to 0 and the cap starts to discharge when the cap charge drops below reference voltage the comparator out put goes high and the cap starts to charge again through the feed back resistors and the cycle starts all over again.


So you have a fet/s connected to the output of the oscillator so you are using the 36V power supply to power the CFL? How do you know the current is too high? The load usually determines the current draw.

Which complete circuit are you speaking of here? I hope one that is oscillating for you, because you can only control the current using the pulse width circuit and it has to be functioning properly.


Yes Zero I have finished my circuit and I did the dual out put one using the LM339. I will try to get it tested today. I will post my success or failure.

Hope the above helped a little.

Regards
Larry

1. The circuit is Bob's combination circuit derived from Mad scientists design with the LM393's from the earlier posts, emailed Bob my drawing and he said is the same.
All components are 100% accurate and I waited for correct parts to arrive before I made my first attempt, have re-checked the circuit four times now, removing all parts and replacing them fresh other than resistors.

I know how to put a circuit together and this has made my beyond angry


2. Current is measured from the negative terminal from the primary source (12V batteriesx3) in series with an analog panel ammeter connected to the common ground of my circuit. (I do 12V tests mostly or add the LM317 for 24-36V)


3. Correct, this is how the cap should behave. The only time the cap recieved 1/3 to 2/3 of Vcc was in a "single comparator test circuit" and on both the DMM/DSO I could see the fluctuating voltage and triangle wave.

Next step in for Bobs circuit to act this way???


4. Yes the load should determine the current draw, with a 6V @ 118 Ohm bulb that only draws mA testing the LM317, acts like a short since draws high amps. I can place a neon/CFL there and will light as I tap the primary connection but for AMPS, not mA.

I did place a YouTube clip here with my replication of the effects. The 555 timer circuit I refer to is shown and has worked fine for a month. Like you said the LM339 circuit will allow for adjusting both the frequency/duty cycle and not just having the duty cycle set like I have in my 555 PWM circuit.

Mine is set to 8% at 22Hz the Radiant enters the neon and can dial the frequency to 1.2kHz calculated, only take it up to 400Hz at 12V input

I knew this would make it seem like I can't replicate this by failing this second circuit but I have the proof in my YT clip here. Second clip that I posted showing a blown neon working off only the negative Radiant output may of generated a question


This was the only question I should of asked

When you hook your CRO/DSO on the output pin/s of the comparator does the circuit oscillate or just go logic high/low?

I checked my 100nF cap and takes charge and is 102nF measured on my DMM but I will order more online as I'm down to my last.

Thanks for the reply and hope to show the clip of the LM339 based PWM circuit if it ever works for me.

P.S - The 555 based PWM circuit I use is simple and was derived from the basic demonstration circuit with a 555 timer found online.

This will help in the end my friend, I just need to ascertain where my error lies. Since others are having LM339 issues I hope they post here and define the cause.

Regards
Zero

[iankoglin]

@iankoglin
Schematics need more resolution, costs a bit to see.
In your lm317 circuit the diodes must be 1N4002, no need to use NTE576, but works also. Diodes NTE576 are for the coil.

Oscilator circuit:


Drawing is components side, right? Pinout for the lm339 is correct, pin 2&4-5 and pin 1&6-7.
I think the + also be wired to lm317 regulated output. Do not use the jumper, pin 5 to ground is incorrect, right?

The coil looks good

I do not see the schematic of your 555 circuit.

G'Day Torpex,UFO and all
I finished wiring up the LM 339 circuit and when I ran it It took 5 seconds and blew all the Mosfets.
I am sure I wired up the circuit correctly the same as the 555 timer before
each time I blew the whole 6 mosfets I don't think it's the nut on the end of the soldering Iron.
It could be my coil it is made as follows
The coil is made up of 6mm MDF ends
The centre core is PVC pipe 56mm OD 127.6mm + 2 MDF ends
The wire is 8 strands of (AWG #14 or 15) diam 1.5mm magnet wire 76 turns per strand

I have up loaded some more Pics here
Kogs UFO Photos pictures by Kogs1 - Photobucket
I think my coil strands are probably too short

@ UFO I seem to have missed something and I am sorry if you are unwell if that is what your problem is I hope you get over soon.

Kindest regards Kogs

[ZeropointEnergy]

Thankyou for the information

Regarding output pin of coparator LM339 / LM393:
These components feature an so called open collector output - that is - they contain a transitor to GND only and can sink current only to GND. The only internal output transistor is connected with its emitter to GND and the collector is open - it is directly connected to the output pin without any further internal connection.
see

Why is this so important?

The notion above determines that our IC can NOT source any current to the subsequent gate of the FET. It definitely can not control the FET in order to switch on. There are a plurality of reasons why open collector (OC) is used in electronics but it will defer explaining that. Comprehend it as unfortunate fact.

So please understand that the only source of current to the gate of the FET is the pull up resistor. Unfortunately the gate features a gate capacity of approx. 1 nF and this needs to be charged higher than 10V before usual FETs are fully switched on. (see data sheet)
If a capacitor is being charged by a fixed voltage and a resistor - the action behaves not linearly. see Here we can get the notion that it takes fairy long time in order to get a FET completely in ON condition.
In low condition all the current sourced by the the pull up resistor will be drained to GND. The output of the comparator can sink minimum 6mA / typical 16 mA (data sheet). So let's decide to load the output with approx. 10mA in order to get a safe design. We will get about this current by a 1.5K resistor (alternatively two 3.3K in parallel) at 12 V supply.

Now waht activation time of the FETdo we talk of?

See RC CALCULATOR

If you enter:
12 V / 1.5K / 0.001µF = 1 nF / and 10V charge voltage you get a time of 0.0027 = 2.7µS
Same with 10K -> 0.0189ms = 18.9µs

Both values are not exciting but the first one is much more suitable in order to prevent FETs to get hot because of lazy switching! So please understand that it makes no sense to get super fast FETs and control, them by a lazy messanger.

No let's calculate multiple LM393 outputs in parallel:
We can take two comparators and two pullups in parallel = 750Ohm -> 1.2µs
Same with 4 outputs in prallel: = 375Ohm -> 0.7µs = 700ns
The last two examples perform the capacitor charging in the time area of the switching time of the comparator. That is a fair tradeoff and more current makes no sense because it will not increase the switching speed considerably. The limitation wil remain teh switching tiome of the IC.

EXCEPTION:
You drive several FETs in parallel. You have to deal with multiple of 1nF in parallel. It would be a good choice to spend for every FET a dedicated double comparator LM393 in parallel and place it very near to the gate of the dedicated FET. (We did not talk about inductance of long thin wires yet!!)

See sample schematic

Now let's calcualte a very negative example in contrast: 4 FETs / single drive 10K -> 71.7µs!!!!

I am convinced that some of your setups suffer an low drive capacity. This is my suggestion in order to drive your FETs in a more safe operation area while dealing with low cost circuits.

BTW: The NE555 can sink about 20mA (similar to 2xLM393) but can source about 200mA at switching time of about 200ns switching time - that is a big difference to 10 or 20 mA - is it?.

Hey John Stone,

First, I missed this last night or would of replied then

Thankyou for all the effort in explaining the LM339 circuit processes. I have spent many hours over a week researching these comparator circuits.
This extra information hopefully makes it all sink in to ascertain a complete understanding of the processes in the circuit to troubleshoot my error.

Looks to be a bit of experimenting and research on the data presented to be done on my part. I have no excuse not to create a working LM339/393 based PWM circuit and will only be a question of what time I allocate to the project

Regards
Zero

[torpex]

Hi @kEhYo77

Thanks for your answers, looks very interesting.
Waiting for their progress

Not the type you would expect but I'm getting there...
I tested a circuit from this site (the one below) and I found it not working properly. I ditched the last stage of that circuit and replaced it with a 555 + LM393 and now its performance is ideal. I'll post this updated schematic because it is good alternative for people without microcontroller skills...

Yes, i feel the same, comparator oscillator not the best and 555 has frequency problems with pwm setup. My new circuit has two oscillators.

II've played with pwm mosfet and shorting coil, i read 20mV to 430mV in dmm, i seems gate voltage.
I think it may be interesting to adjust the resonance without lab equipment.

[torpex]

Hi @Ufo
I hope your problems will be resolved soon. Good luck.

Now, are you "slowly" dialing Up?...or are You rushing it as potentiometer turning means?
Purple light shows at low pulses...and is like playing on a thin ice for it to disappear on you, as you keep going up...

How thin is this "thin ice" in Hertzs?
When set, ¿with what Hz range lost the adjustment?

[torpex]

Hi @JohnStone

Thanks for your excellent explanation, good improvements can be.

But, other issue:
How to improve the Time(fall) parameter?
Of course better switch time, better Tf, but how improve Tf mainly above all?
To get the best cut-off using semiconductor.

If you enter:
12 V / 1.5K / 0.001µF = 1 nF / and 10V charge voltage you get a time of 0.0027 = 2.7µS
Same with 10K -> 0.0189ms = 18.9µs

May be 17.9µs?

[torpex]

G'Day Torpex,UFO and all
I finished wiring up the LM 339 circuit and when I ran it It took 5 seconds and blew all the Mosfets.
I am sure I wired up the circuit correctly the same as the 555 timer before
each time I blew the whole 6 mosfets I don't think it's the nut on the end of the soldering Iron.
It could be my coil it is made as follows
The coil is made up of 6mm MDF ends
The centre core is PVC pipe 56mm OD 127.6mm + 2 MDF ends
The wire is 8 strands of (AWG #14 or 15) diam 1.5mm magnet wire 76 turns per strand

I have up loaded some more Pics here
Kogs UFO Photos pictures by Kogs1 - Photobucket
I think my coil strands are probably too short

@ UFO I seem to have missed something and I am sorry if you are unwell if that is what your problem is I hope you get over soon.

Kindest regards Kogs

Hi @Kogs

Yes, seems too little resistance in the coil.
But the pwm can adjust without burning mosfets.
It is important to know if it oscillate and put the pots to min. to start.

Some steps for test purposes:
The main thing is to control the flow limiting the amps.
Only 12-15v Power source.
Connect only 1 mosfet, may be other model (>400 Volts rated).
Connect other coil, may be a power transformer primary or secondary.
Insert 5w car bulb between the positive and the coil.
You can measure frequency and amps drain current?
I see several diodes in the coil, how are they connected? is assumed to be only 2.
look at this post: http://www.energeticforum.com/renewa...tml#post197164

I believe that the geometry of the coil should be squarer, if you use 56mm OD then use 56mm height. I think in my last coil I used more height.

Good luck

[Ufopolitics]

Hello Kogs

G'Day Torpex,UFO and all
I finished wiring up the LM 339 circuit and when I ran it It took 5 seconds and blew all the Mosfets.
I am sure I wired up the circuit correctly the same as the 555 timer before
each time I blew the whole 6 mosfets I don't think it's the nut on the end of the soldering Iron.
It could be my coil it is made as follows
The coil is made up of 6mm MDF ends
The centre core is PVC pipe 56mm OD 127.6mm + 2 MDF ends
The wire is 8 strands of (AWG #14 or 15) diam 1.5mm magnet wire 76 turns per strand

I have up loaded some more Pics here
Kogs UFO Photos pictures by Kogs1 - Photobucket
I think my coil strands are probably too short

@ UFO I seem to have missed something and I am sorry if you are unwell if that is what your problem is I hope you get over soon.

Kindest regards Kogs

Hey Kogs,


You seem to have a very bad short on your output (between Drain-Source)
Or your Coil have too little resistance. A minimum accepted to run it safely would be 0.8 to 1.0 ohms.
If you have below that, then the oscillator will short out and blow all mosfets.

Your Coil is very nice, however, too high awg (14-15) X 8 strands...That makes it almost zero resistance my friend!

One thing you must do before turning on the oscillator is measure resistance of Coil!!...I bet you barely have 0.3-0.2 ohms...that is almost zero...
You have to play with your mosfets RdsOn time/resistance response rate...if they are too slow, they will burn like a fast blow fuse.

The other thing is NOT TO DRIVE IT UP TO MAX LIMITS in one turn!!,...BUT SLOWLY...VERY SLOW!!

Regards


Ufopolitics

[Ufopolitics]

My Situation

Hello to ALL,

For the last couple of years I have been completely involved into my findings, first I wanted to make sure in every way I was not wrong, so I searched every literature related to electrodynamics interactions, controllers and methods of windings in every language you could think of...
I have developed great machines, they all can do what our classic physics says it can NOT be done, Overunity, However, I could not find why it was happening...till recent days back, when I re-designed and incorporated all the interactions into moving 3D Software and CAD programs.

I have been dedicated too long to all this, I could say it has become an obsession that I just can not stop, an addiction to make and remake...time and money spent in thousands of hours and money...I lack to attend my own business, my life...my family...

Now it came to a point where I have to "pay back" for all that time that I have been absent in that part of my life.

None of our Generators will be able to produce enough current ever, the way they are conceived, wounded, interacted electromagnetically ...only by applying heavy Horse Power of Force/torque and thousands of RPM's will be able to deliver a voltage/amperage...and requirement to be ran with only gas engines...

I have run Asymmetric Machines with Asymmetric Machines...I have run Symmetric with Asymmetric...they still produce more than Input...it was and is a lie...We can get them to do overunity anytime...without much effort. And I am not only talking about Radiant Energy...but meaning basically Hot Electricity.

Frustrations and anger have taken over myself for the past years...and the wishes to disclose my entire project for free, without any interest to make a single penny, but to let Humanity know we have been deceived.

I am not writing all this to ask ANYONE for help...I will get out the same way I got in...for me to "make money" is a simple deal...I have learned to do that in order to survive for all my years working by myself. I just want to present PROOF, of what I am saying...to prove I am making it happen and How it is achieved...But it is not simple at all, None of Us is "prepared" to accept something they have taught is "Not Possible" to achieve EVER.


IT IS A SIMPLE AND PLAIN LIE!



This Simple Coil arrangement I have thrown here on this Thread, is just "The Basics" the beginning of very complex interactions where many coils in this arrangement turn on and off delivering massive energy outputs...So, this is just a "proof", a simple one to show how it works...

I am preparing some nice videos of several machines at work...where you will be able to see how much they can output...But I am still re-winding them ALL from scratch...cleaning them, painting them and re-isolating them...talking about nice big generators...run by little motors...


I just felt I should write here and share with you all, my "status"...so you know a bit more about myself...


Thanks for reading me


Regards to all


Ufopolitics

[larryross]

Hi All
I finally got around to testing my LM339 circuit and everyone is right it doesn't work... No it's not the nut behind the soldering iron, but the nut that up loaded a non working drawing. I used Mad scientists's drawing and changed the pin numbers to match an LM339 pin out. In my circuit, the first stage is the problem... the circuit can never bring the cap up to the reference voltage of the pos input so the output goes high and never can go low. I will fix it and show corrections if it would be beneficial. This circuit could have never worked for Mad scientists so I am suspicious that he has had a lot of laughs on us trying to build this bogus circuit. If I am wrong and someone has built one exactly from this drawing and it works then they should helping others get there's going.

UFO, First I hope you get your problems worked out... life is always getting in my way all the time so I can understand.
I would never have gone off on this tangent except for your statement that radiant enters during off time, and my concern that I wouldn't get the proper frequency to call her in, and your statement about the future need for a complimentary output signal. I thought I would be saving time and money (very important to me) to do a universal oscillator. So is it a waste time trying to fix this circuit? Should I just replicate your circuit which I would have instinctively done (sorry, but I was listening to you and hanging on your every word). Help me get on tract I don't want to add confusion here.

If I build the 555 circuit, is it just a test circuit (UFO quote "The 555 CAN NOT adjust the Duty Cycle, just the frequency, and it is up to certain "volume Up" that it will keep frequency, then it moves to an almost linear state (not good)...However, for my testings I do not require to go that high (so far)".) and we will be discarding it for something else before we are done?

Zero... if several of us work on the circuit we can fix it faster (so by all means go for it) although I think I know what is wrong and will test my theory today some time. For instance JohnStone seems to be knowledgeable and should be (even though the info he shared probably helped some) helping to fix the circuit (it is wrong).

Regards
Larry

[bbem]

@Ufo, oh boy it is surely is addictive
I surely hope all turns out well for you eventually.

You have a kind an generous soul.

Regards, Bert

[JohnStone]

...
How to improve the Time(fall) parameter?
Of course better switch time, better Tf, but how improve Tf mainly above all?
To get the best cut-off using semiconductor....

Hi torpex,
the switch off time behaves similar.
LM339 output is supposed to sink 6mA minimum / typical 16mA. In fact it will drain more than data sheet points out because the manufacurers give secure data they never will exceed.
In this case the discharge cycle is difficult to calculate because we have no constant current but a transistor with dynamic behaviour. Don't forget that the LM393 needs to sink the current from the pullup resistor additionally to the discharge current out of the gate capacitance.
This is the reason why I suggested to source about 10mA only by the pullup resistor. So you have some freedom to sink both currents (pullup + gate cap) at same time.

BTW: Professional FET drivers source and sink up to several amps for short time!
Anyway it is no gimmik at all if there is the advice to use multiple comparators in parallel.

Alternatively you might decide to follow the advice using a NE555 for every FET. Previous post They sorurce and sink 8 times the current of a LM393. The solution is somewhat more straight forward and separates the oscillator from the drivers.

BTW: The 10 Ohm resistor at output will dampen parasitic oscillations between gate capacitance and the inductance of the wires. see
This is a problem at IGBTs as well!

[JohnStone]

oscillators

The current suggestions for control circuitry are difficult to understand by newbies or can not be adjusted in a linear manner.

I confess I was lazy and bought a PWM kit. I like this circuit and I share it for your convenience. The circuit features nicely separated functional blocks - so it can be built and debugged easily - step for step!
10Hz up to 100Khz in 4 overlapping ranges.

AND MOST IMPORTANT: IT WORKS!

1. It runs from 5V so use any 5V regualtor available (LM317, 7805 .....) Modifications for 12V possible but not advisable. With 5V we can start with a single 12V battery for test in order to prevent blowing FETs in case of failure.
2. Most left is a variable current source - charging capacitors - linear behaviour! The LM385 reference diode (2.5V) can be replaced by 4 diodes in series for now. This part can be built first and and measured with a simple DVM. You might decide to use a 100µf cap first in order to be able to verify teh basic function in very low frequency mode with your simple DVM.
3. The 393 is dedicated to discharge control. It is a very smart circuit and I will elaborate more on it if requested.
4. Output 7 of LM393 outputs a sawtooth signal.
5. The most right IC is a super fast comparator with FET in ns range. You do not need this spec just now. It can be replaced by another double LM393 being nicely separated from the oscillator!!!! This comparator converts the saw tooth signal into a pulse width signal.

I do not want to seduce anybody for using this circuit. If you are content with your circuit - use it! If you are not content you might decide to try this one. On request I will elaborate more reagarding the function and will draw an appropiate schematic.