Peter, whatever happened with Eric P. Dollard?

[albertMunich]

There is also SCHWILLE ELEKTRONIK close to Munich who built the original Meyl coils. Mr Schwille made the program for the drawing of the concentric coils and etched the printed circuit boards. I think he still has them for sale.
google for Schwille Elektronik and you will find him. BTW he sees the whole Meyl/Tesla system as a kind of open capacitor.

[garrettm4]

Wire Diameter Error in Given Equations, Also Coil-Form Width Compensation Problems

This may have already been pointed out, but there is a minor error (~+8%) in the coil spacing for the wire diameter equation given by Mr. Dollard (caused from the divisors exact figure). I’m working out my transformer build and came across this problem, so I thought I would pass along the correct divisor and the step by step solution as well.

Algebraically, the wire diameter can be found by using:



Where,
h = coil height (20% of width given) (in meters)
d = wire diameter (soon to be found) (in meters)
T = number of turns (20 given) (numeric)
S = spacing factor (62% given) (numeric)

It can be seen that the wire diameter times the number of turns PLUS the spacing in-between the wires ("fill factor") should give the total height.

For given desired parameters (listed above):





Wire Diameter:



Remember that the wire diameter d is given in meters, so be sure to move the decimal to the correct place if using cm or mm when looking for wire.

Thus for a 20 turn, single layer solenoid, with 62% coil spacing, the wire diameter is 3.1466331% of the coil height, where coil height is 20% of coil width. (Interestingly the wire diameter for given conditions approximates pi% of coil height, this may just be a coincidence, but I thought it was something to point out. You could simplify the design process by using this as a "shortcut".)

The error of the original “32.8” divisor comes out to be a 67.36842% coil spacing factor instead of the specified 62%, which inadvertently causes a smaller wire diameter to be used than wanted. I believe this to be caused by a “double rounding up” mishap of the divisor when Mr. Dollard wrote it down (the 31.78 if accidentally rounded up “twice” would give 32.8). It would seem Murphy's Law was the culprit here.

---------------------------------------------

Something else to point out, is that "a" given by Mr. Dollard is the "Fill Factor" NOT the "Spacing Factor". This is a debatable issue of "semantics", BUT, I think this should be explained a little better, so that there are less misunderstandings for those building the Tesla Transformer.

"Fill Factor":



Where,
a = Fill Factor (numeric) (this is the dead space PLUS the turn count)
T= Turns (numeric)
S = Spacing Factor (numeric) (this is the ratio of wire diameter to coil pitch) (62% given)

The fill factor is an interesting quantity, if analyzed it will be seen to be the dead space or unused portion + the turn count this when divided into the height of the coil produces the available space for wire, it also subdivides this space yielding the maximum wire diameter. As can be seen, this yields a limiting case for maximum wire size, or the ideal size for use, for a given spacing factor and number of turns used. You can go smaller in the wire diameter if you want, although its not all that useful to do so. Furthermore, the spacing factor S is another limiting case, the minimum spacing needed. SO you can go bigger in the spacing department as well if needed.

"Spacing Factor":



Where,
S = Spacing Factor (numeric) (62% given)
d = wire diameter (in meters)
P = coil pitch, the distance between the center of one turn and the next (in meters)

It can be seen that the "spacing factor" is the ratio of wire diameter to coil pitch. This ratio is found according to the Radiotron Handbook to be best for all coil types at 0.60. Mr. Dollard has outlined 0.62 as the spacing factor desired, interestingly this is very close to the reciprocal of Phi (0.61803... = 1 / 1.61803...). NOTE, this is a limiting case, the 0.62 is the minimum required and the Ideal for use, BUT can be increased without too much harm. Just don't go any LESS, don't put your wires too close, its better to keep them spaced.

Coil Pitch:



or



Where,
P = coil pitch (in meters)
r = wire radius (in meters)
d = wire diameter (in meters)
l_2 = distance in-between wires (in meters)

It can be seen that the pitch is the distance between the center of one turn and the next, or the sum of the radius of both wires and the arbitrary distance in-between each of these wires.

Distance In-Between Wires (for given parameters of S):



I though this might help people who have already wound their coil, to see if they have the correct MINIMUM spacing (if your l_2 measurement is bigger don't worry if its smaller you need to fix it), otherwise this isn't all that useful. For coax users you need to factor out the jacket for this to be helpful.

---------------------------------------------

NOTE FOR COAX USERS (specifically on the secondary winding):

I don't know if anyone has ran into this issue as well, but the coil-form's width (w_0) should be one wire-diameter length (d) smaller to accommodate the wire correctly.

(Original Coil-Form Width) - (2 * (Wire Radius)) = (Compensated Coil-Form Width)

Or



where,
w_0 = the original coil-form width (derived from turn length) (in meters)
d = the wire diameter (in meters)
w_1 = the compensated coil-form width (in meters)

Coax with the jacket left on would exacerbate the alignment error and lower the coil Q due to dielectric losses of the jacket (the jacket should be removed, albeit a PITA to do). This becomes a bigger problem if large coax or more than 20 turns is used (greater offset error), the wire wont line up to be a perfect 20, or however many turns at the end, if the coil-form isn't compensated for the use of large diameter wires and also for the wire's jacketing.

With this adjustment, the CENTER of the wire will be placed EXACTLY at the previously calculated "imaginary cylinder SURFACE" of the Coil-Form w_0. If compensation is not done this may give rise to lower magnification factor because of "less complete turns" (the 20th turn would only be partially complete, getting worse with thicker jackets and larger wire diameter), although this really is only a problem for coax users, like myself.

---------------------------------------------

Furthermore, the "turn length" l_1, is in theory a perfect ring of a minute diameter not a split and stretched ring (helix) with (potentially) substantial diameter like is seen on the coil-form while building (this is exacerbated with large spacing factors). This leads to the coil-form being too wide for the desired number of "complete turns" for the given length of wire used, this is still true even if you compensate for wire diameter. To make more clear what I am saying, the resultant helix is longer than the calculated circle, thus less turns are produced for a given length of wire.

I will put up the "helix correction factor" for the new compensated coil-form width in a bit.

I want to point out that the adjustments I have talked about are very minor and would only change the physical dimensions of the coil-form a very very small amount and with building tolerances considered they might not even be worth the extra effort to implement.

Garrett M

[Kokomoj0]

For german speaking readers (or use google translate), here Meyl is debunked.
Skalarwellen

There is a guy "Jensen" selling replications of the the meyl resonating coil sets on ebay.com for a thrith of the price by the way.
wdjensen123 | eBay

The guy on ebay has a completely different design and takes into consideration none of what eric has been talking about, however meyl does seem to at least take the spacing into account.

translated into english:

The scalar Meyl'schen

Only academic misconduct or misleading marketing of pseudo-knowledge?

by Dr. rer. nat. Klaus Keck

Professor Meyl marketed demo and experiment kits for 800, - EUR or 1400 - EUR. Which allegedly one anywhere in the room space available energy can be detected. In this documentary, I show that Meyl blatantly against the academic integrity violation and justifying why I am of the opinion that the buyer takes Meyl his sets, the participants in his seminars and the buyers of his books are misleading.


Introduction >>
Marketing of Meyl'schen sets
Space energy, overunity and neutrinos
Scientific misconduct
Experiments with the demo set >>
The lazy trick with the "ground wire"
Contradictory statements
Over Unity, for only acting in good faith
Measurements with the demo set >>
Attempts by Waser
Report of Naunin
Measurements of Weidner
Meyls scalar-set has no
CE-Marking >>
Ohn this labeling may not be sold, the set
and the buyers can not set into operation
Tesla's patent >>
Relying on Tesla's patent is misleading
Comments >>
Meyls opinion on Naunins report
my comments
Scientific misconduct
Legal regulations >>
An example >>
Examples of Meyls "New Physics"
Preliminary observations >>
Electrons without charge >>
Matter-antimatter photon >>
The abolition of the 2nd Law of thermodynamics >>
The deactivation of radioactive waste - abiogenesis >>
Biological utilization of neutrinos >>
The soft Obelisk of Aswan >>
Chicken with fusion reactor >>
The crook of the augurs >>
The water car >>
Meyls work in the public >>
Verdummungs events and their effect
The remarkable part of the FH Furtwangen
Esoteric lectures >>
Esoteric theses >>
A positive example of the USA >>
Recent developments in Furtwangen >>
Opinion of the dean of this report >>

Conclusion >>

Feb. 03:
Meyls Steinbeis Transfer Center has been closed
March 03:
Scalar Syndrome >>

March 04:
Prof. Meyl ensures the distribution of overunity sets a >>

Supplement May 2008
Looking back at Meyls great esoteric show at the Southwest Fair in Villingen / Schwenningen >>
Meyl >> about his critics
Version of the documentation of 16.05.2008

nothing about debunked in the titles but lots of general tesla put down by steiner physicists.

I was thinking Eric would have an explanation of what could be going on there and how meyl can possibly claim more out than in when it does not follow precisely teslas work? It seems these would be important distinctions in need of examination to aid in our understanding and design?

Meyl just has 2 flat coils on double sided pc board as described in my previous post.

that and no only are they debunking meyl but also tesla if that is the case. meyl claims over unity, that said he is either lying, got lucky and it works, or the einsteiners are out to get him and of course if they do, since he is representing teslas work, without a functional explanation from the tesla supporters will take the whole idea down with him.

Cant just sit back and throw rotten eggs without an empirical bona fide explanation why his should not be working and is (if he is not lying), and why we cannot seem to get the same results?

See the problems here this unfolds in the scientific community? Lot at stake here in my opinion.

[pnajafi]

lmpused DC

Let me know how useful this analogy is:

when you have a pandlum swining, you can push the pandulum by holding it and going with it to the other side of the swing, then changhe direction and push it back. This is a continues sine wave input to the Tesla system.

With pulsed DC, however, you just wait for the pandulum to swing and just at the right time, you tap it. If you tap it at the natural frequency of the system the pandulum will keep swinging more and more.

In the first case, more energy was inputeted to push and move back and forth wit the pandulum and in the second case much less input is used.

How useful or correct is this analogy in your opinion, I am trying to understand more.

[Web000x]

Goldmine

The following is a presentation given by Eric at the San Francisco Tesla Society on December 9, 2007. I'm working on getting the corresponding Powerpoint presentation to go along with it.

Eric Dollard - S.F.T.S. - Dec. 9, 2007 - Part 1 - YouTube

Eric Dollard - S.F.T.S. - Dec. 9, 2007 - Part 2 - YouTube

Eric Dollard - S.F.T.S. - Dec. 9, 2007 - Part 3 - YouTube

Eric Dollard - S.F.T.S. - Dec. 9, 2007 - Part 4 - YouTube

Eric Dollard - S.F.T.S. - Dec. 9, 2007 - Part 5 - YouTube

Eric Dollard - S.F.T.S. - Dec. 9, 2007 - Part 6 - YouTube

Eric Dollard - S.F.T.S. - Dec. 9, 2007 - Part 7 - YouTube

Eric Dollard - S.F.T.S. - Dec. 9, 2007 - Part 8 - YouTube

When asked if he wanted to sell copies of this presentation, Eric said "No, just put it out there". Sorry for the redundancy, but please donate to this man. He makes WAY LESS money that he should for all of his efforts to help us.

Dave

[Gestalt]

The following is a presentation given by Eric at the San Francisco Tesla Society on December 9, 2007. I'm working on getting the corresponding Powerpoint presentation to go along with it.

Wow! Thanks for putting this up!
Truly a goldmine.

[SilverToGold]

Hi Eric... I'm the guy that asked about the hollow Earth and posted the coyote picture.

Thank you very much for your post concerning your reasoning that supports the hollow Earth theory. I found it very interesting.

And a big thanks for the video that you posted for free to help everyone here. I hope everyone reading this thread will do the right thing and donate money to you.

[lamare]

(II) There exists no real engineering “Theory of Gravity”, none. There is no “Tesla Theory”, no “Einstein Theory”, no Theory at all. All we have is guesswork and speculation, nothing for the engineer. All we have is the basic algebraic expressions of Newton, and the observations of astronomers. Gravity tells us what to do, we do not tell it what to do. Hence the idea of gravity is akin to the idea of God, unknowable. But to be sure we do have no shortage of priests muttering in Latin.

Not quite. There is one. Paul Stowe's ether theory. Basically a definition of a fluid using Newtonian terminology, which is an arbitrary choice for describing the ether:
Tuks DrippingPedia : Stowe Personal E Mail

From this Newtonian superfluid, he can define ALL physical processes in terms of his description of the ether:

I have determined that in my opinion all of physical processes can be defined in terms of the aether populational momenta (p). Such that,

Force (F) -> Grad p
Charge (q) -> Div p
Magnetism (B) -> Curl p

Gravity for example is Grad E where E is the electric potential at x. This resolves to Le Sagian type process as outlined in the Pushing Gravity models. The electric potential E in turn is created by charge which is Div p...

My model is a direct extension of Maxwell's vortex model of interacting rings (the smoke ring model). I have been able to define all fundamental constants in terms of basic parameters, including the gravitational constant G. Further, G is, within this system, seamlessly integrated to all others, fitting into a unified system.

The key to this system's definition is the realization that charge is fundamentally a result AND the measure of the compressibility of Maxwell's aether.

The idea that gravity = grad E aligns very nicely with the Biefeld-Brown effect, whereby "anti-gravity" is produced using asymmetric capacitors:

Biefeld–Brown effect - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Lifters Experiments home page by Jean-Louis Naudin

In other words: gravity is basically the Venturi effect in the ether:
Venturi effect - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

An equation for the drop in pressure due to the Venturi effect may be derived from a combination of Bernoulli's principle and the continuity equation.

Nothing mysterious here. Just what you would expect in a fluid-like medium as the (a)ether...

[madhatter]

For those who have managed a radio signal from the 3 coil setup, how? I've built and re-wound these coils till I'm dizzy and get zip nada nothing, i've matched surface area, tried density, re-calc'd and re-crunched the numbers. I've also tried the 3 different schematics looking for anything and get nothing.

a simple AM crystal radio works fine, but the primary, 2nd and extra coil arrangement net nothing.

[Kokomoj0]

For those who have managed a radio signal from the 3 coil setup, how? I've built and re-wound these coils till I'm dizzy and get zip nada nothing, i've matched surface area, tried density, re-calc'd and re-crunched the numbers. I've also tried the 3 different schematics looking for anything and get nothing.

a simple AM crystal radio works fine, but the primary, 2nd and extra coil arrangement net nothing.

are you able to get it to resonate at and around the freq of the station?

if you make a tiny tank and drive it on the same freq near the receiver it should go nuts, if not you may not be tuned properly?

[madhatter]

are you able to get it to resonate at and around the freq of the station?

if you make a tiny tank and drive it on the same freq near the receiver it should go nuts, if not you may not be tuned properly?

No idea, please explain the 'tiny tank'.

one of the other things is the eq for the coils have some inconsistencies as posted. I'll put them in a new post.

[madhatter]

examining the posts on the coil calcs I've run into some questions, there is one sheet with a 30 turn reference any ideas on why? the other has to do with the secondary wire dia.

From “Calculating Process For a tesla coil”
(4) side by side wire spacing, given 62% of wire diameter, given for 20 turns, a wire diameter,
d=h/32.8
The above was considered in an earlier post as a numerical error so that 32.8 should be 31.78.
Another posting:
Number of turns = 30
Space factor: a = 30+18 = 48
This being derived from a=[n+(n-1)0.62]
Wire dia,
d=h⁄48

Another posting:
20 turn secondary coil
Maximum solid conductor diameter,
d_s=5.1 x 〖10〗^1 ÷√f
Or
d_s=h⁄(√f)

If we run the calcs for each based on 1000kHz
0.4782 cm, 20 turn
0.2111 cm, 30 turn
0.0151 cm, 20 turn
Aside from the odd 30 turn sheet that was posted there is a difference in the two 20 turn secondary coil equations that have been posted.
The equation in example 1 & 2, checks out by taking the wire dia given and adding in the 62% of the wire dia to total and it will equate to the height. The third eq ends up being only 31.466% of the coil height. If instead of using Hz but kHz as the frequency it’s a bit closer, but kHz is not 1 per second as noted in the post.

-note- the equations above are in LaTex but don't seem to translate here in the post.

[Kokomoj0]

No idea, please explain the 'tiny tank'.

one of the other things is the eq for the coils have some inconsistencies as posted. I'll put them in a new post.

just to load the generator, it will transmit a very short range, enough to check your tuning without physical connection.

if you have a strong enough generator could also use a 50ohm resistor

you really need to find out where the coils are resonating and their tunable bandwith.

[madhatter]

could this be the issue? from post #1109 byT-Rex:

"8) Underground vs over ground. Two identical Tesla units will not compare. They cannot receive E.M. waves. For over ground use a conventional crystal set with a dipole, not a ground Marconi antenna. A loop type receiver is even better, a big loop over ground and a big star radial underground. Thus a dipolar connection over ground, a monopolar connection underground. The Landers Mojave Research Installation used a beverage over ground and a wideband Alexanderson underground."

How will using a signal generator to transmit be picked up if they cannot receive it?

[Sputins]

Grounding system?

a simple AM crystal radio works fine, but the primary, 2nd and extra coil arrangement net nothing.

What sort of grounding arrangment are you using?
Remember the radio signal we are attempting to receive is the underground transmission. So unless there is a solid connection to the Earth, it will be difficult to receive anything.

At least you have constructed something, my build is still under construction (Some how my coaxial cable order has not yet arrived, seems it's lost in the mail)? The formers are built, await winding.
Grounding will be many copper rods into the ground. (I found some masonary drill-bits, 25mm diameter, and 1meter long. With an extension, I should get at least 2 meters deep (hope for more). Hammer then the matching Copper rods into drill holes. Connect together with heavy strap and solder.
Smokey has some good info on coils and diodes on the yahoo group.

keep try'n.