Help/Ideas for Bedini test bed

[boguslaw]

Very good thoughts! Clearly the solution is using spikes and charge capacitor.
Do you have any experience with zener diodes for large power (called transils) . I need to invent a reliable overcharge protection to dump excess voltage safetly at high rate. Transils are good but for accidental excess power dump while we need continuous protection when things start to accumulate too fast Think about snow ball effect. If we could have parametric resonant circuit then it will work always at maximum circulating power and this surely is the solution for loading resonant circuit !!!!!
THINK ABOUT IT

Capacitor was called condenser in the past ....

[ZPDM]

@Boguslaw

First I have looked at about 2 or 3 of Tesla's lectures/papers and I was in all honesty wondering does condenser mean capacitor so many thanks there. Second thanks for the compliment. Third, "the solution is using spikes and charge capacitor" I may actually have some idea what you are talking about (though I may not), as I mentioned in my previous post is there any difference between diodes and thyristors (SCRs) in this situation? Never heard of transils, nice to hear about them and have no idea why you mention them.

"I need to invent a reliable overcharge protection to dump excess voltage safetly at high rate." You are making a bold statement there Mr. Boguslaw and if you weren't such a handsome Devil in your portrait I wouldn't have bothered responding! The rest about parametric resonant circuits is all Star Trek the next generation to me, i.e BS.

I am thinking to put all this on the back shelf, though I will look further into charged capacitors and possibly continue with that avenue.

Really there are two areas I will look very much into now because you can actually get your hands on them. The first is the astonishing work done by Slobodan Milosevic, mea culpa, mea culpa, mea culpa, I love the Serbians for being Serbian and through Tesla for giving us much of modern society, I meant, Veljko Milkovic. If you haven't looked at his two stage oscillator take a look ... it's a humdinger as Dr. Lindeman also attests to.

Second is the work of the late Dr. Eric Laithwaite (D.Sc, PhD) through his children's lecture on gyroscopes (I could almost follow it!) Eric Laithwaite's lecture on gyroscopes part 1/7 - YouTube

Ciao,

Paul

[ZPDM]

Boguslaw,

When I re-read what I write I can sometimes come across wrong. I genuinely appreciate the input you provided. I am not saying the parametric idea is at all nonsense, only that it is over my head. Thx again.

[arigatou]

Having said that, the scope is limited to design, know that you want in the operating frequency range to really help. You can make their own custom specifications, of course.

[ZPDM]

Update

Just thought I would a give a brief update. I may try and make a first video illustrating some of this but also myself sometimes find text info more rapid and/or enjoyable So the cliffnotes would be that this will be some very basic stuff maybe old hat to many but may be worth a read and will deal with some properties of pulsed DC especially as relating to one wire transmission of power. Keep in mind I have no extended formal education or work experience in electronics if I step in some silly or obvious gopher holes.

Okay so according to my multimeter 1) when you pulse an inductor with direct current there is no direct current from the coil, there is however an alternating current that registers. The potential of this current is magnified with a transformer set-up. It would seem self-evident that the frequency of the AC is identical to the pulse rate of the DC however, I don't yet have an oscilloscope so that is something I would like to know in future. Whence the AC current? Don't know, my guess is that it comes from the expansion and collapse of the magnetic field around the Bloch wall of the electromagnet (inductor).

Let's now consider a transformer pulsed with DC by a function generator at say, I don't know, 5 Khz. The two ends of the transformer coil as noted earlier show no DC but do show AC. If we now take a diode and attach it to one end of the coil and measure the potential between the end of that diode and the other free end of the secondary coil, there is now next to no AC on the meter, mais voila!, there is now a DC current there. Where did that come from? This set-up should be eminently familiar to anyone who has been doing anything with the Bedini style pulse generators, it is the Bedini set-up, just using a function generator for the signal.

If we now take the diode and reverse the orientation there is again a DC voltage but of opposite sign. (“Negative" and “Positive” energy?). If we move the diode to the other end of the coil and measure again between the diode and free end we again find two voltages of opposite polarity. I spent some time trying to figure, well can I capture all four of these voltage potentials when it also occurred to me that I had a diode in one orientation which was positive in respect to the free end of the coil and if I switched it, it was negative. What about two diodes connected to one end of the coil, in opposite directions with the probes at the end of each diode? Mais Viola! a potential difference coming from one end of the wire, and it will charge a capacitor!! Amaze (more likely bore) your friends and family, it is one wire transmission of power. Shortly after I realized that this set-up is the Avramenko plug or put another way half a bridge rectifier. John Bedini for instance has previously demonstrated attaching a rectifier across two ends of a coil hooked up in series – when you look at it that is two Avramenko plugs then joined in parallel. It is a bit silly because the coil attached in series registers neither DC or AC power, but you can “rectify” it and have DC coming out.

There are some differences between the one-wire and "Bedini" style set-ups (I realize John Bedini has likely explored both such set-ups and more I am just reaching for terminology). The power flowing through the one-wire, at least at lower voltages is quite significantly less than with a "Bedini" one diode set-up. However, if one charges a capacitor with a Bedini set-up the power draw initially spikes then decreases as the cap fills, likely in response to the increasing resistance in the cap and decreased current flow. The power draw does not vary and is independent of load when charging a cap with a one wire set-up. That should be note worthy for self-evident reasons.

So now we have Ye Olde one wire transmission of power. I say ye olde because Tesla described this in his patent on a new way for electrical lighting over 120 years ago. Patent. It is interesting that he voices his seeming surprise in this patent and speculates as to the effect. Say what you like about old Tesla (hopefully I'd say nice things) but he wasn't afraid to brute force a solution. So he was working with much higher potentials, however, he informs us that the magnitude of the one wire effect is dependent upon potential and pulse rate. Also one might note that this patent in essence describes the Tesla Coil but that is getting afield. The diode, as a vacuum tube, would be invented a few years later, a solid state version being some decades later. Interestingly Tesla has a patent for a hydraulic "solid state" diode.

If one goes back to the "Bedini" set-up, now that we know that the input is AC current the circuit looks, I believe, identical to the first leg of a Cockroft-Walton voltage multiplier. Haven't done anything further with this yet but is interesting to look at how this multiplier device is believed to work. The diodes act as one way valves which trap the various iterations of the alternating current in each capacitor (you can read Wikipedias write up on it here here). This may be what is happening with this example of one wire transmission of power. The alternating current is shunted through each oppositely oriented diode at 5000 times per second which reads as an instantaneous voltage difference on a meter. If a cap is attached the power gets "stuck" in the cap. I have no idea why the amp draw remains unchanged I would have to guess it gets replenished almost instantaneously from ground. So yes, if this is what is happening one could see why having a larger voltage difference or a faster switching would lead to more power flow.

So, many others have reported similar things, Jonny Davro If I'm not mistaken has a video of some tinfoil (gotta love it) around a large plasma ball with one wire going to light a few flourescents. My thanks to him, Lidmotor, Slayer007, Lasersaber and many others for helping guide many enjoyable hours of exploration.

One way to have a little more inexpensive fun with this is to pick up a little USB plasma globe for 4-5 bucks. 4 screws and you have the one wire coming out which is at a fairly high voltage. So this does strengthen the weak one wire effect somewhat, just as Tesla said. Once one starts fiddling around with the diodes though there are lots of effects some seemingly very subtle and some a bit less so, it certainly remains somewhat confusing to me. Aw heck I'm not gonna make a video unless people say to. I think you get the gist of it all. Happy Experimenting!

[ZPDM]

And Another Thing

And a few more things. Waiting for some high voltage/fast switching diodes, capacitors and the like at the moment so I thought I'd BS for awhile. Some of you may know all this and more already so if you wish don’t waste your time and skip this, some of you may not know this and enjoy the read, some of you may actually know all this and more and I would ask you to please read it.

In my last post I detailed a very simple way to observe one wire transmission of power using two apposed diodes. For the concepts and confirmation I would again point people to Tesla’s patent on a new way for electrical lighting. It is all there and that is the first patent that I know of relating to one wire transmission of power. I haven’t yet read much Tesla but that’s a good one. Rectification of this power awaited the development of diodes.

So I am posting because I stated in the last post that I could not understand why there is no change in input power depending on what you try to charge with a one wire set-up. I now have a concept for that. It took me awhile to think that the power isn’t flowing from one end of the rectified one wire current to the other, (diode to diode) the current flow is internal to the capacitor.

There are levels of explanation that may be valid and I won’t touch on ether or propane, quarters or quaternions, just wondering how far the concept of a rectified alternating current might go.

Cifta, if you happen to read this, I realize we didn’t get off on the right foot because you didn’t appreciate my terrible and possibly offensive sense of humor, so just for you I am going to try and restate some of this in much more precise and technical terminology, at least as best as a non-engineer might know how to do such. So ...

1) Capacitors are “Nervous Nellies”, right?? Sheesh, everyone knows this, it is the "Law of Nervous Nellies." Immutable be thou law of Nervous Nellies.
2) So Freida Faraday (the capacitor) is happily tending her house (oh yes, she was, she was) when suddenly there is a 500 volt potential between the north and south sides of her house. “Oh my, oh my, oh my ... What a mess" says Freida, "we can’t have this.” Upon which she takes out her broom and begins sweeping electrons (or whatever the heck causes current flow) from one side to the other in an attempt to get rid of the mess
2.a) The current never flows between the two diodes in rectified one wire transmission. The current is internal to the capacitor as a response to the change in environment. That occurred to me (or mentioned to me) last night. The oscillator (DC pulse at the diodes ends) would have established this environment, for the same input cost, whether a capacitor had been hooked up or not. As I have seen experimentally it is oblivious to what is hooked up there.
2.a.1) Anything with capacitance will respond to the voltage difference by attempting to equalize it out (though apparently with varying efficacy). Capacitors, batteries, etc. Some things might phosphoresce in response to unrectified one wire output. There may be other effects but again anything which can have a current flow in response to its new environment will do so.
2. b) The current flow will be proportional to the voltage difference established
2.b.1) The voltage potential established is proportional to the inductance established (when it collapses).
2.b.2) The input required to establish the inductance is proportional to the resistance in the system.
2.b.3) The capacitance which responds to its new environment doesn’t care how the voltage potential was established. Hence I now see why both Tesla and Bedini are often heard saying “high inductance, low impedance”, or some such. At first I had no idea, was this a relation between the primary and secondary coils on a transformer, between the collected output in a cap and the input, or what? No, to put this most simply, you want to establish the highest voltage possible (through a high inductance) through the least cost possible (low resistance).
2.b.3.a) Been thinking so much about the establishment of the new environment of a voltage potential across capacitance, what about when the voltage is suddenly shut off? I think there are three possibilities 1) it acts like when a water pipe is quickly closed, i.e. "ca-chung, ca chung ca chuuunnng" 2) it acts like a car with the gas let up in neutral 3) it acts like a car with the gas light up in gear. In any event, if in batteries current flow is determined by a number of currents not merely the electron flow but heavier ion flows, one could see how establishing a momentum of current flow might lead to some further charging after the input is entirely discontinued.
2.b.3.b) Inductance certainly remains very confusing and mysterious to me, i.e Tesla’s set-ups don’t seem to make much sense as compared to the normal iron core/turns ratio analysis. I’m not certain how on a practical level to make a really good coil yet for high voltage transforming. This is one reason why I am enjoying the thumb sized USB plasma ball circuit which goes from 5 to a few thousand volts as a test bed. (though darn it I want to be able to replicate something in the same ball park from parts from an old TV ... and I know a few tricks to reduce input amp draw once I have control of the circuit).
2.b.3.a.1) I do realize now that with AC current, increasing frequency drives the current to the outside of the wire. So at 60 kHz one has a 30 gauge wire (depth of current flow) whatever one started out with, hence large diameter or Litz wire (or Coaxial I believe) for very high frequencies.
2.c) The current flow is proportional to the frequency. However, per the above there are technical difficulties with increasing the frequency beyond a certain point without running into problems.

What else ... I really strongly suspect at this point that the whole issue of “negative energy” relates to half wave rectification and whether you are rectifying the top or bottom half and that there are qualitative differences between the two, though I may be way off base here. Want to look into that in future. The one diode/Bedini style set-up strikes me as a hybrid between open circuit and closed circuit topologies.
2.d.1) Another big mystery to me is why if you split the current again off a diode you again get a positive and negative, that makes no sense because you already rectified the current to positive and negative, but there it is. I have no clue on that, maybe some sort of phase shift but it don’t make much sense.

So that’s about it. I have no idea whether I am (zeig heil!) “overunity” or not. At some point I’ll probably see, but really the point is to find joy in creation. I’m not certain what I would wish for here, you look at it one of our main advancements over the past 400 years has been the increasing ability to stone each other at 1600 ft/sec, or throw a half ton stone at 2000 mph 15 miles. Really, I’m a big eugenicist too, just based off the 10 commandments. Yes I realize that often does me in too, but I generally can’t help it, unless I’m caught, lol.

Free energy solves nothing. I agree it is better off in normal peoples hands than those of our “leaders” but what do you think the HAARP and similar terrors might be, but “free energy”. One safety valve here seems to be that some types despise creation, hence they are unable for a prolonged period of time to hold onto any of the insights into creation given by people who actually inquired into the matter with honesty. As a possible corollary and put another way, if we don’t shape up and keep talking to one another, Tesla (though I am certain he was a good man) may be a proximate cause for the destruction of the world.

Okay can I offend anyone else or speculate idly about more gloom? Can’t think of anything. In all honesty I haven’t formally confirmed any over unity (been having too much fun exploring) and may be full of hit so the ruminations about the direction of technology and the few experiments I’ve done might be considered in isolation.

Ciao,

ZPDM