COP 17 Heater | Rosemary Ainslie

[witsend]

Hi henieck - I didn't realise you were Russian. I got it that you were from the Netherlands. Interesting. I can't comment on your set up because I'm not sure about the capacitor - but I get it that your ammeter is able to do the necessary? I was given to understand that all such are restricted to a lowish frequency. My first tests - very crude - were done with voltmeters - but they certainly worked.

What circuit are you testing? May I ask?

[witsend]

This from Donovan. I've simply copied his email. Hopefully Aaron, you could look to his registration? If you're reading this?

Also I see that henieck <http://www.energeticforum.com/members/henieck.html>, is seeing the field collapse now in a different way.

Here is a little something for all to think about.

According to Kirchoffs Laws (or as Dr Stiffler so rightfully stated rules of thumb...).
1. In a circuit, the current entering a circuit (as seen by the source) would be the same as the current leaving the circuit at that same instant in time, now
if we had our little experiment as follows. Dry Cell battery +ve connected in series with a switch which is connected in series with an ammeter which is in series with a coil ( inductor) which is in turn in series with another ammeter and then returns to the dry cell -ve terminal.
We would satisfy ourselves that this law seems correct.
2. Using the above setup as a reference, we can then say that the magnetic field forms when we close the switch.
3. Now as we all know when the switch is opened we see the reverse flow as the field collapses. If at this instant when the switch is opened and the two ends of the wire(battery disconnected) are shorted out we see the same current flow through our ammeters(reverse direction).
4. This then leads to a contradiction to or addition to Kirchoffs law not so? As we've put in 1unit of current, we got out 1unit of current at the same instant. Now if we disconnect the battery and short out the terminals, all of a sudden we have another unit !.
So the question then is, in classical terms, where did this extra energy come from ??

[henieck]

If you can persuade a manufacturer to make a robust diode with a tolerance in many thousands of volts - this system could also be applied for the average household uses.

- as I mentioned gas tube rectifiers and switches can handle any voltage or amperage you are capable to deliver and solid state devices cannot compare with them. In every place where really high parameters are required they are in use to this day because there is no other substitute for this. The technology is known to man for almost hundred years, so it is no obstacle to build even big heating plant.

[witsend]

henieck - if so, then this can definitely be applied everywhere. All that is needed is replication. Can I ask again, which circuit are you testing? Is it ours or some variation?

[henieck]

Hi henieck - I didn't realise you were Russian.

- I am not Russian - a have just happened to have a piece of Russian equipment inherited form my father who was a physicist. It is probably from the sixties. The more I use it the more respect I have to it. Of course I mainly play with today's small LCD display units but there is so many places to monitor that I find myself taking this additional "brick" over and over again. I am from Eastern Europe, Poland - now United Europe (so instead of listening to Moscow we are now doing everything like Brussels wants

I am playing with your circuit basically. Transistor 2SK1120, diode BY448, ca. 12V, 7Ah flooded, motorbike battery. 3W direct output heats my 15cm ceramic core 12’C above ambient within 15min, while only above 3.8 ‘C while powered by transistor with capturing the energy from the collapse (11% of the input). I used capacitor so I could more quickly and accurately determine the amount of energy recycled from the magnetic collapse, but I did it only in Bedini way so far, because I am more familiar with it and it allows me to use entirely empty capacitor. Capacitor is just like a small battery - but you can very quickly charge and discharge it completely. I am going to remake my coil for higher then 3 Ohms resistance now. I will com back to the exercise very soon.

[henieck]

Can anybody please explain how to insert image - because when I press this button system wants url address from me.

[witsend]

TinselKoala - THE ONLY APPROPRIATE CIRCUIT DIAGRAM that I can assure you is correct is the diagram in the paper. And the flyback diode is a critical part of the system.

The circuit diagram in the Quantum article was prepared by Brian Buckley. I cannot comment on whether it is right or not as I simply cannot read it. I am hoping that Donovan will be able to comment in due course. I don't think he has even seen that article - as published.

But it is definitely required as without it we cannot 're-route' the collapsing fields back to the battery to recharge it.

[TinselKoala]

TinselKoala - THE ONLY APPROPRIATE CIRCUIT DIAGRAM that I can assure you is correct is the diagram in the paper. And the flyback diode is a critical part of the system.

The circuit diagram in the Quantum article was prepared by Brian Buckley. I cannot comment on whether it is right or not as I simply cannot read it. I am hoping that Donovan will be able to comment in due course. I don't think he has even seen that article - as published.

But it is definitely required as without it we cannot 're-route' the collapsing fields back to the battery to recharge it.

OK, so now we at least know that the Quantum diagram is WRONG--because, at minimum, it does not show the flyback diode. Nor does the Quantum article, as far as I can tell, even discuss this diode.

(The duty cycle generated by this circuit is also WRONG as anyone who can build it could tell you. But we'll ignore that for the moment, since nobody is using that circuit any more. Except perhaps those innocent experimenters who are trying to build what you have published, but aren't reading these threads.)

Now, since the Quantum article doesn't even mention the flyback diode, but in the EIT paper it is "definitely required"...yet these two documents seem to be describing exactly the same experimental runs...there is still an inconsistency that needs to be resolved.

And don't you think you should publish some kind of retraction or correction to the Quantum article, at least, since we now agree that the circuit diagram is in error and wasn't used to generate the experimental data in the paper?

I find your comment that you "simply cannot read" a simple circuit diagram in a paper that has your name on it, to be quite remarkable. Especially since you are teaching us about electronics.

[TinselKoala]

And one final note on the duty cycle issue:

I refer here to the EIT paper, circuit diagram labelled Figure 1 Circuit Schematic Diagram.

Oscilloscope Channel A is shown monitoring the load at its connection to the positive battery rail.

When the voltage at this point is HIGH--at battery voltage--the mosfet is OFF and the load is non-conducting. When the voltage at this point dips, it means that the MOSFET has turned ON and conducts through the load to ground.

An oscilloscope connected here will report a 3.7 percent ON duty cycle--that is, signal HIGH 3.7 percent of the time--when the mosfet is OFF 3.7 percent of the time.

This fact is independent of whether the circuit is driven by a function generator or a 555 or even a reed switch.

If your power calculations are using the 3.7 percent ON figure taken from an oscilloscope connected as in the EIT paper, Figure 1, they are in error--because a HIGH reading here means the mosfet is OFF.

Now I can't quite figure out just how you did your power calculations--for some reason the phrase "integrating the instantaneous power waveform" doesn't seem to appear in your description of the process. Could you "walk us through" the exact process you used, perhaps with some sample data, so we can try to understand if your power method was equivalent to one that someone trained in electronics might use?

[lionhart]

Hi all, just started to read all these posts, with some interest.

And, don't know if this is relevant but you can stack MOSFETS to get more current through them. unlike bipolar tranys which will run away with current if you stack them, MOSFETS will increases resistance as they heat up, so to decrease current heating just parallel them as many as you need.

[DrStiffler]

How one looks at it

@All

Well I have been trying to stay away and out of the fuss, but I will add 2 cents more and hobble back to my lab.

IMO

We do not have a Free Running device here, I see where no one has claimed such, so that is put to bed.

IMO

The issure of energy returning to the battery, well its all in how you look at it. Are you an optimist or a pessimist, is your bank account 1/2 full or is it 1/2 empty, this means different think to different people.

IMO

The only issue I see and care about is after the end of the day have I moved more Heat out of the circuit than I input from the PSU? If so we have something, if not we are playing games here.

IMO

So why isn't every interested party looking for the true possible benefit from this circuit? Hey I know a couple of Styrofoam cups will not win you a Nobel, but it will get you a ticket.

IMO

Lets prove it of disprove it. Don't we all have anything else in our lives to do but expound rhetoric?

[witsend]

Hi Dr Stiffler - Your comments are noted and your advice good. Do hope you read Donovan's email - thread 258.

Regarding battery recharge - I get it that there is some question to the actual charge of the battery. I'll get back to this. I want to refer to the BP report which details the results.

And lionhart - I've actually tried mosfets in parallel. It never quite worked - unless we were doing it wrong. If the one blows they all blow. It was quite an expensive exercise. Could be that we stressed them too far. Used on our ac tests from a utility supply source.

[Michael John Nunnerley]

BP report

Hi Dr Stiffler - Your comments are noted and your advice good. Do hope you read Donovan's email - thread 258.

Regarding battery recharge - I get it that there is some question to the actual charge of the battery. I'll get back to this. I want to refer to the BP report which details the results.

And lionhart - I've actually tried mosfets in parallel. It never quite worked - unless we were doing it wrong. If the one blows they all blow. It was quite an expensive exercise. Could be that we stressed them too far. Used on our ac tests from a utility supply source.

Hi Rose
Is it possible to get a copy of this report because it sure would be of benifit especially if as it should show all the circuit set up and testing points etc etc as well as the results

Mike

[Michael John Nunnerley]

Oh and valves are the best, I have my faithfull yaesu 101 with final output as valves and it never fails me,100watts output always and now it is old

Mike

[Aaron]

posting pics

Can anybody please explain how to insert image - because when I press this button system wants url address from me.

Henieck,

When writing a message here, click this icon:


You can then enter a URL (web address) to where your picture is. If you don't have a personal website, you can upload pics for free at a site like photobucket.com.

You can attach pics, but the attachment space for each account here is very low so I'd recommend hosting your pics elsewhere.