Ionizationx: a clean environment is a human right!

Projects by members => Projects by members => Steve => Topic started by: Steve on September 13, 2009, 17:22:08 pm

Title: Pulsed signal 60% more effective then strait DC
Post by: Login to see usernames on September 13, 2009, 17:22:08 pm
Hi folks,

As result of the negative " resonance" spike that i found
(http://www.ionizationx.com/index.php/topic,1172.msg12319/topicseen.html#msg12319)
i continued with my coil collection, to see how to harvest that spike and re-use it in the proces.

Here are the numbers:
Reference point, strait DC with cell : 0.50Amp x 1.79V=0.895Watts

Coilsetup:
Circuit with coil and cell = 2,4vr x 0.29amp= 0.695Watts = totall consumed power of the circuit with cell.
Measured what is going into cell (after the coil)= 1.79v x 0.50amp=0.895Watts

Thats 28% less power in then with strait DC but still same volts and amps entering the cell.

Coil = big toroid
Frequency= 640hz
Mark= 60%
Space= 40%

I re-ran this test more then 4 times. Always the same conclusion.

Steve
Title: Re: Pulsed signal 30% more effective then strait DC
Post by: Login to see usernames on September 13, 2009, 18:18:44 pm
Stevie , that picture you showed is a classic curve , I can show you the same exact curve with this 2n4401 ,  nothing but a saturated transistor that has problems getting unsaturated .  Your transistor is probably dissipating that missing power . This is due to excessive base current and too large a storage time

Nothing special here Stevie ...

http://home.mira.net/~gnb/audio/bakerclamp.html
Title: Re: Pulsed signal 30% more effective then strait DC
Post by: Login to see usernames on September 13, 2009, 18:50:59 pm
Stevie , that picture you showed is a classic curve , I can show you the same exact curve with this 2n4401 ,  nothing but a saturated transistor that has problems getting unsaturated .  Your transistor is probably dissipating that missing power . This is due to excessive base current and too large a storage time

Nothing special here Stevie ...

http://home.mira.net/~gnb/audio/bakerclamp.html

What does that have to do with my claim here?

Steve
Title: Re: Pulsed signal 30% more effective then strait DC
Post by: Login to see usernames on September 13, 2009, 18:52:06 pm
My question to you all:

Where does this extra power come from?
Coil? Water? tubes?

Steve
Title: Re: Pulsed signal 30% more effective then strait DC
Post by: Login to see usernames on September 13, 2009, 19:35:28 pm
There is no extra power , only lower power dissipated in your cell because your switching device is now acting as a resistor .

It has to do with the way you are pulsing is total crap .

Do a google search for a purpously made "mosfet driver" , then buy a power mofset .

Make sure the mosfet driver is compatible with your pulsing logic level .

Make sure to keep the leads very short , and put a bypass capacitor , as shown in the datasheet of the mosfet driver .



Title: Re: Pulsed signal 30% more effective then strait DC
Post by: Login to see usernames on September 13, 2009, 23:01:19 pm
There is no extra power , only lower power dissipated in your cell because your switching device is now acting as a resistor .

It has to do with the way you are pulsing is total crap .

Do a google search for a purpously made "mosfet driver" , then buy a power mofset .

Make sure the mosfet driver is compatible with your pulsing logic level .

Make sure to keep the leads very short , and put a bypass capacitor , as shown in the datasheet of the mosfet driver .

Dankie,

I see that i didnt wrote well down on whats happening here, so i modified the first post for better understanding.
Please read my first post and data again.

Reference =strait dc. No transistors are used there. Amps in are 0.50
With the circuit, there are still 0.50 amps flowing thru my cell.
However, input power is 28% lower. :)
If my cell saw a higher resistance, amps would drop and to compensate that, you must raise voltage and totall wattage.
In my case i see the totall wattage go down and still having same voltage and amps on my cell..... ;)

Dankie, i have fets here and fet drivers. For sure i do know how to build me a nice switching circuit. Results here have nothing to do with choice of transistor or Fet or IGBT.

Steve











Title: Re: Pulsed signal 30% more effective then strait DC
Post by: Login to see usernames on September 13, 2009, 23:09:04 pm
may be the cell is acting as a capacitor when charged with a pulse then when it is of it energizes your coil so nothing is wasted ,

the question is your cell producing the same amount of hho   .
Title: Re: Pulsed signal 30% more effective then strait DC
Post by: Login to see usernames on September 13, 2009, 23:13:27 pm
may be the cell is acting as a capacitor when charged with a pulse then when it is of it energizes your coil so nothing is wasted ,

the question is your cell producing the same amount of hho   .

I havent measured that in detail, but on sight it looks the same.
But i will run the gas test this week.

Steve




Title: Re: Pulsed signal 30% more effective then strait DC
Post by: Login to see usernames on September 14, 2009, 10:58:49 am
I wonder if actually quantifying the power being applied to the cell, in both straight and pulsed power setups would help "proof"the concept.

This would need to be done with a possibly smaller cell due to power limitations of batteries, but the procedure might be as follows:

R C modelers are quite adept at quantifying the capacities of their on-board battery packs.  They [capacities]determne the craft's performance and survivability.  Hardware is available in the form of in-line power meters, recording charger and discharge cyclers, as well as other devices that actually count the electrons, as it were, applied to charging a pack.

Using what is available, power your cell in question with just such a pack to a predetermined discharge voltage, straight DC.   Wait a predetermined period of time, [cooldown] and then recharge the pack.  Record the mA required to return the pack to full charge.   Now repeat the process several times, and you will get a clear picture of how many milliamps of current were applied to the cell to produce "X" volume of gas till the pack reaches the discharge threshold.

Now, using the very same pack, apply the pulsed approach to the cell, cut off at the same voltage, and measure output.  Repeat as above, counting the mA for the charge as what was applied for gas production.

[note- the charger will terminate charge at the same point regardess of discharge load.  Be sure to monitor pack temperature, as this affects charge reception (warm packs take less)]

Now the above seems a bit arduous at best, but it should provide some hard numbers on how much power was actually delivered to a cell over time, weighted against actual gas output.

I have all the equipment for such a test, but have yet to try it.  If I may,  I will use the above frequency and and duty cycle to perform a similar test in a couple weeks.  This would be valuable information if I get similar results.

And even if I don't get similar results it would be interesting to see the comparatives between what our power meters say we used, and what the actual battery mA delivered sez.   Methinks we shall see a gap.   More on that later

Turtle
Title: Re: Pulsed signal 30% more effective then strait DC
Post by: Login to see usernames on September 14, 2009, 11:10:50 am
There is a formula found on page 12 [12 in the text] of this document

http://www.free-energy-info.co.uk/P1.pdf

that delineates the means to accurately determine actual applied power.

Item 15 is the way they figger amps consumed in a pulsed  DC application.

I don't know calculus, but I was told this approach will more accurately reflect power than an RMS ammeter will.

I don't know; haven't tried it yet.   Still it should offer a more difinitive answer.  The whole document seems to agree with Steve's findings, tho funding was pulled before the researcher could difinitively prove the point.

Sound like a conspiriacy...

<groan>

Turtle
Title: Re: Pulsed signal 30% more effective then strait DC
Post by: Login to see usernames on September 14, 2009, 13:23:56 pm
There is a formula found on page 12 [12 in the text] of this document

http://www.free-energy-info.co.uk/P1.pdf

that delineates the means to accurately determine actual applied power.

Item 15 is the way they figger amps consumed in a pulsed  DC application.

I don't know calculus, but I was told this approach will more accurately reflect power than an RMS ammeter will.

I don't know; haven't tried it yet.   Still it should offer a more difinitive answer.  The whole document seems to agree with Steve's findings, tho funding was pulled before the researcher could difinitively prove the point.

Sound like a conspiriacy...

<groan>

Turtle

Hi Keith,

I have seen that document before and i have read it too.
I do know you have similair cells as i have, so you must be able to replicate it.
If you want, i can help you setting it up.
Just send me a PM.

About that way of testing as you descriped, that is too much for me. I do my measurements with 2 scopes and 4 multimeters and math.
The scope is a true rms meter and i also did the math by hand by measuring the squarewave on the input of the circuit.
Because the voltage coming from the coil into the cell is DC, there is no rms calculation needed.

Best regards
Steve












Title: Re: Pulsed signal 30% more effective then strait DC
Post by: Login to see usernames on September 14, 2009, 13:34:18 pm
It seems that the coil is gaining some energy from somwhere
Title: Re: Pulsed signal 30% more effective then strait DC
Post by: Login to see usernames on September 14, 2009, 14:51:25 pm
Steve, can you explain what you are measuring exactly?
if you measure total input on a series cell and simultaneous the input at the cap it will seem that there is more power at the cap than total.
that is because voltage at coil and cap are out of phase with the voltage generator (+pi/2 at the coil, -pi/2 at the cap) and in resonance they cancel out, so you may have 10V in total but 100V at the coil and cap. that is why there are higher voltages at the parts than you feed in. the current is always the same at every part because it's in series.
there is no mysterious power coming from somewhere.
Title: Re: Pulsed signal 30% more effective then strait DC
Post by: Login to see usernames on September 14, 2009, 17:18:46 pm
Steve, can you explain what you are measuring exactly?
if you measure total input on a series cell and simultaneous the input at the cap it will seem that there is more power at the cap than total.
that is because voltage at coil and cap are out of phase with the voltage generator (+pi/2 at the coil, -pi/2 at the cap) and in resonance they cancel out, so you may have 10V in total but 100V at the coil and cap. that is why there are higher voltages at the parts than you feed in. the current is always the same at every part because it's in series.
there is no mysterious power coming from somewhere.

I use my parallel tubecell in this test. No seriecell, yet.
I also have not cap in this setup.
Just a stabilized powersupply.
Coil is in serie with the cell.
1 crowbar diode

Current before crowbar diode = 0.29amp
Current after crowbar diode with coil = 0.5amp

I know. Its strange.

Steve
Title: Re: Pulsed signal 30% more effective then strait DC
Post by: Login to see usernames on September 14, 2009, 21:28:50 pm
Pleading ignorance, what is a crowbar diode?

Thanks,

Turtle
Title: Re: Pulsed signal 30% more effective then strait DC
Post by: Login to see usernames on September 14, 2009, 22:07:08 pm
Pleading ignorance, what is a crowbar diode?

Thanks,

Turtle

Mea culpa,

Its a diode from negative to positive. From transistor/fet to positive wire, across the serie coil and cell.
Steve
Title: Re: Pulsed signal 30% more effective then strait DC
Post by: Login to see usernames on September 14, 2009, 22:15:18 pm
Thank you.  Then crowbar has to do with its placement in the circuit, rather than the actual type of diode.

Have a great day!

Turtle, slow
Title: Re: Pulsed signal 30% more effective then strait DC
Post by: Login to see usernames on September 14, 2009, 22:36:10 pm
Thank you.  Then crowbar has to do with its placement in the circuit, rather than the actual type of diode.

Have a great day!

Turtle, slow

Hi turtle , great to have you here . We know you have been working on this for years now .

Its an honor  ;)
Title: Re: Pulsed signal 30% more effective then strait DC
Post by: Login to see usernames on September 15, 2009, 01:51:44 am
So you sending in a frequency the same as the frequency you picked up in the cell Steve?

Sounds like resonance to me!?
I would have thought that less power would be needed to keep the cell resonating at the same amplitude?
Cant wait for the gas tests!  Perhaps volumes will pick up the longer its runnung!?
 :)
Title: Re: Pulsed signal 30% more effective then strait DC
Post by: Login to see usernames on September 15, 2009, 05:23:40 am
Hi turtle , great to have you here . We know you have been working on this for years now .

Its an honor  ;)

I 'm just glad to be able to still work at this,  but I am indeed living up to the name.

Without question... perseverence is part of my shell

Turtle, still at it
Title: Re: Pulsed signal 60% more effective then strait DC
Post by: Login to see usernames on September 15, 2009, 23:15:56 pm
may be the cell is acting as a capacitor when charged with a pulse then when it is of it energizes your coil so nothing is wasted ,

the question is your cell producing the same amount of hho   .

I havent measured that in detail, but on sight it looks the same.
But i will run the gas test this week.

Steve

Gas tests are done.
Strait DC or coil circuit are producing exactly the same amount of gas.
So, that good news, finally.

I changed every component in the setup to see if anything else would work better.
There was 1. When i changed the old 2n3055 for a FET irf630, i got a better result.

I know now how to tune the circuit. Results are getting better when lower amps are used.
The sad thing is of course that with lower amps, production is going down as well.

My best result is at this moment a stunning 60% more efficiency...at a current of 0.1amp at the cell.... ;)

I must admit that Stan Meyer was right. Restricting amps is the way to go....Never thought i would say that the last months..... ;D


Steve














Title: Re: Pulsed signal 60% more effective then strait DC
Post by: Login to see usernames on September 16, 2009, 03:34:48 am
That is an excellent news Steve ,hope you can acheave better production with the same 60% effecencie.
i am just waiting for my ferrite to arrive from ukrane and i will do my tests .

Title: Re: Pulsed signal 60% more effective then strait DC
Post by: Login to see usernames on September 16, 2009, 04:29:09 am
WHat about solid state DC relays for your switching?

http://www.futurlec.com/RelSS.shtml

They could handle big power, and wrap the inductor with heavier wire, mebbe?

Turtle
Title: Re: Pulsed signal 60% more effective then strait DC
Post by: Login to see usernames on September 16, 2009, 08:38:56 am
That is an excellent news Steve ,hope you can acheave better production with the same 60% effecencie.
i am just waiting for my ferrite to arrive from ukrane and i will do my tests .

Well, its just the way you look at it.
If i would say, that i keep the same power on the input, then you automatically get more power on the output and more gas.

So, yes. I make more gas for the same amount of power. 60% more gas.

Steve

Title: Re: Pulsed signal 60% more effective then strait DC
Post by: Login to see usernames on September 16, 2009, 10:07:51 am
WHat about solid state DC relays for your switching?

http://www.futurlec.com/RelSS.shtml

They could handle big power, and wrap the inductor with heavier wire, mebbe?

Turtle



Hi preacher,

Those SRR's are nice toys to play with. I had some.
The trick is more to find a switch with as less resistance as possible and no sparks during switching.
The heavier wire is good. Less resistance too. Any bulky wrapped coil is killing.


Steve







Title: Re: Pulsed signal 60% more effective then strait DC
Post by: Login to see usernames on September 17, 2009, 20:08:20 pm
...Results are getting better when lower amps are used.
The sad thing is of course that with lower amps, production is going down as well.Steve

Do you drop the voltage to get the lower amps Steve?
Title: Re: Pulsed signal 60% more effective then strait DC
Post by: Login to see usernames on September 18, 2009, 04:19:57 am
Sounds like to me,,, You need High current,, and high voltage, Hrmmm..

Can Some one Please tell me what happens when you Put High Voltage and High Current together? Hint, Electric field, Magnetic Field ;)

Why is there No Voltage fields when using Low voltage at high currents?
Why is there No Magnetic fields when using High Voltage at Low currents?

What happens if you put High voltage, with high current? You get a Load of Power consumption in the Giga Ga Lomba Major wattage, ;

Imagine, 100,000 Volts, 250 amps ~ ~ Thats 25,000,000 Watts! Would that Have Contain Both Magnetic and High voltage fields?

How can this system be tricked? I seriously do not know, However, I do know the best production of gas will come from either 120 volts, or 220 with a Meaty and Photatoy current flow, Say 7 amps.

Just what i feel about that. Fun to post for me, sadly i cant test anything.
Title: Re: Pulsed signal 60% more effective then strait DC
Post by: Login to see usernames on September 18, 2009, 04:32:04 am
I think this is relatred to cavitation , water is being trashed around with those inductive kicks , back and forth back and forth ,,, There is a resonance point to any motion ... With a 3tubes setup with alternating polarity there is no bubble build up is what I have discovered ..

+ the electron phase ? We dont see that .

Also , DC offset , important ...
Title: Re: Pulsed signal 60% more effective then strait DC
Post by: Login to see usernames on September 18, 2009, 13:00:00 pm
Why is there No Voltage fields when using Low voltage at high currents?
Why is there No Magnetic fields when using High Voltage at Low currents?
by looking at the energy equastions E = 1/2 * C * U²  for electric and E  = 1/2 * L * I²  you can see that when there is current or voltage, both fields will exist. They may be too small to be measured, but they exist.
Of course i'm refering to a capacitor and a coil connected together, otherwise C or L is nearly zero.
Title: Re: Pulsed signal 60% more effective then strait DC
Post by: Login to see usernames on September 18, 2009, 14:23:36 pm
...Results are getting better when lower amps are used.
The sad thing is of course that with lower amps, production is going down as well.Steve

Do you drop the voltage to get the lower amps Steve?

When i tune the frequency of the circuit, i see a very clear amp dip, but voltage stays the same. (Stan Meyer: Voltage takes over!!!! Amp inhibiting!!!)
I also see amps dropping when the voltage is tuned down, but thats the natural behaviour of electrolysis.


Steve
Title: Re: Pulsed signal 60% more effective then strait DC
Post by: Login to see usernames on September 18, 2009, 15:15:45 pm
Great stuff Steve!

Have you tried playing around with harmonics? of your frequency?

I'm still not sure if this frequency is cell specific, or electrolyte specific?
What changes it?

People I suggest clicking; File; Save As; for the pages of this thread.

Anyonee else testing this?
 :)
Title: Re: Pulsed signal 60% more effective then strait DC
Post by: Login to see usernames on September 18, 2009, 16:19:30 pm
Great stuff Steve!

Have you tried playing around with harmonics? of your frequency?

I'm still not sure if this frequency is cell specific, or electrolyte specific?
What changes it?

People I suggest clicking; File; Save As; for the pages of this thread.

Anyonee else testing this?
 :)

It seems that its just me having fun.

Steve
Title: Re: Pulsed signal 60% more effective then strait DC
Post by: Login to see usernames on October 20, 2009, 22:34:03 pm
A man needs multimeters.  :)
I wanted 4 similar ones for my OU tests.
So i bought 5, because 4 or 5 where the same price.

To see if they where really similar within the 1% range, i hooked them all up at once on the same PS.

Last shot is my collection.... ;)

Steve
Title: Re: Pulsed signal 60% more effective then strait DC
Post by: Login to see usernames on October 22, 2009, 22:06:47 pm
This circuit doesnt work with seriecells.....argggggg
The seriecell is holding too much charge and that way the coil is not working well.
Coils need to discharge to get the needed gain.
This test reduced my stock with 10 FETS......

Steve

Title: Re: Pulsed signal 60% more effective then strait DC
Post by: Login to see usernames on October 23, 2009, 06:35:30 am
So, a true parallel cell would only permit you to run at around 2 volts.   Hmmm... could you pair the cell with the coil, then daisy-chain the pairs in series to drive it at a higher voltage?

Turtle
Title: Re: Pulsed signal 60% more effective then strait DC
Post by: Login to see usernames on October 23, 2009, 15:29:54 pm
So, a true parallel cell would only permit you to run at around 2 volts.   Hmmm... could you pair the cell with the coil, then daisy-chain the pairs in series to drive it at a higher voltage?

Turtle

Thanks Turtle,

Tonight i will try less plates and see what that brings. That will be pretty easy, because all my plates have connectors.
I also can connect some plates in parallel.

Well, lots of testing. Its fun but sometimes hard to do.

ps.

I had really strange readings with that serie setup. at a certain frequency, the ampmeter after the fet was showing zero amps and the ampmeter at the cell was showing 1 amp......uhhhhhhhhh
That was at around 150VDC input in my 60 plate cell. The coil was screaming like a pig.... :)

Steve


Title: Re: Pulsed signal 60% more effective then strait DC
Post by: Login to see usernames on October 23, 2009, 18:23:24 pm
My physics prof laughed me outa the room when I mentioned using a DVM to take power readings on a pulsed cell.

It has to be calculated, for even the RMS function of a meter cannot compensate for the phase shift in power, resistive and reactive.

Mebbe that's why the goofy #s, and mebbe that's where summathese OU claims come from.

That "AIr Force PWM" document has the calculus formula around page 15, but making it work is beyond the turtle's brain

Turtle
Title: Re: Pulsed signal 60%: 25Watt GAIN = 58% OU?
Post by: Login to see usernames on October 23, 2009, 22:26:36 pm
Ok,

Today a good day in the lab.
I rewired the seriecell in less serie and more parallel setup.
Here are the results of the test:
Input in circuit: 20.8V by 2.06A = 43Watts
Input in cell: 17.0V by 4.0A = 68Watts
Gain: 58% = 25Watts

I measured volts with multimeters and with my RMS Scope.
Amp measured with multimeters.

The input voltage is deliverd by my variac with recitifier and big cap.
To be on the save side with measuring, i also measured ac voltage and current  on the secondairy of the variac. That was also around the 45 watts..

So, if anybody can explain why i measure 68Watts, then please stepup.Gas output is equal to 68Watts strait DC....so, the 68Watts seems to be right as well.

Steve
Title: Re: Pulsed signal 60% more effective then strait DC
Post by: Login to see usernames on October 24, 2009, 04:04:54 am
you cant measure it like that if you have reactive components .

You need  to measure with a  wattmeter and calculate phase shift to see your true power used .




Title: Re: Pulsed signal 60% more effective then strait DC
Post by: Login to see usernames on October 24, 2009, 07:15:49 am
WHat about solid state DC relays for your switching?

http://www.futurlec.com/RelSS.shtml

They could handle big power, and wrap the inductor with heavier wire, mebbe?

Turtle



Hi preacher,

Those SRR's are nice toys to play with. I had some.
The trick is more to find a switch with as less resistance as possible and no sparks during switching.
The heavier wire is good. Less resistance too. Any bulky wrapped coil is killing.


Steve

No sparks during switching. Condensers are used for such a thing. And, Yikes,, Ignor the Un edited Edit.
Title: Re: Pulsed signal 60% more effective then strait DC
Post by: Login to see usernames on October 24, 2009, 09:07:41 am
what material is the big toroid made of Steve?
Title: Re: Pulsed signal 60% more effective then strait DC
Post by: Login to see usernames on October 24, 2009, 10:59:42 am
what material is the big toroid made of Steve?

Ferriete
Title: Re: Pulsed signal 60% more effective then strait DC
Post by: Login to see usernames on October 24, 2009, 11:08:27 am
you cant measure it like that if you have reactive components .

You need  to measure with a  wattmeter and calculate phase shift to see your true power used .

It would be helpfull if you come with a complete answer with examples, orso.

To be honest, i dont think the comment of the Prof of Turtle and your comment apply here.
The reason is that i always do gas output measurements and compare that with strait dc or simple pulsed dc. You understand that?
In my tests, i see gas output of 60watts with an input of 40watts...
How i know? Because i know how much gas i have on 40watts in as well...



Steve
Title: Re: Pulsed signal 60% more effective then strait DC
Post by: Login to see usernames on October 24, 2009, 14:07:18 pm
input : 20.8V by 2.06A = 43Watts
output : 17.0V by 4.0A = 68Watts

why don`t you try connecting another toroid coil in between the output and the cell ?
Title: Re: Pulsed signal 60% more effective then strait DC
Post by: Login to see usernames on October 25, 2009, 01:10:08 am
I cleaned up this topic.

Steve
Title: Re: Pulsed signal 60% more effective then strait DC.....conclusion
Post by: Login to see usernames on October 25, 2009, 14:49:40 pm
Conclusions:

Output FET:  43.8Vrms by 4.22A = 184W
Input WFC:  36,5V by 8.08A = 294W
Output AC Variac: 79Vac by 4.9A =  387W (different set of meters as the other 2 measurements points.)
Gasoutput: ca. 2 minutes for 0.5 ltr
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Strait DC into wfc:  37.4V by 7.62A = 285W
Output AC Variac: 41V by 9A = 371W
Gasoutput: ca 2 minutes for 0.5 ltr
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Conclusions:
1.   My meters on the AC side where not identical as the other 4 meters, so a   
                mismatch is very possible between AC power and DC power.
2.   My circuit is a perfect converter for squarewave to strait DC.
3.   No OU or any gains what so ever compared to totall input vs output. (from trafo till
                wfc)
4.   Strait DC still wins against any kind of pulsing circuits.


As you can see, lots of time is again consumed with no results, except the gain of knowledge...... ;) ;) ;)

bammer.......

Steve


Title: Re: Pulsed signal 60% more effective then strait DC
Post by: Login to see usernames on October 26, 2009, 00:29:53 am

As you can see, lots of time is again consumed with no results, except the gain of knowledge...... ;) ;) ;)

Ah, Steve, there are indeed results.    Knowledge.   

And the pursuit of knowledge necessarily takes time.  Thanks for doing this

Turtle
Title: Re: Pulsed signal 60% more effective then strait DC
Post by: Login to see usernames on December 29, 2013, 18:30:46 pm
Hi Ady,

I had to read back what i did during that test.
It came back after reading, so here is what happend.
I used a variac, full rectified and straited out with a capacitor bank.
That wend into a mosfet and that fet was switching on and off a bifilar coil, with an alternative diode setup, as i send to you by email.
The bifilar coil was hooked up to the cell.
By tuning the pwm, i got readings as discriped. There was a hugh difference on the input of the coil and on the output on the cell.
It looked like OU. However, when i started to measure power on the variac side, there was not such thing.
So, totall power in on the pulsed circuit was never less then i measured on the cell.

This setup worked by only with parallel cells or open platecell. Not with drycell constructions.
Its had something to do with the negative voltagepeak coming off the cell after on puls. That voltage goes back into your bifilar coil.
Together with the little capacitance of that bif coil, you create some kind of what ever….  ::)
Maybe some kind of bucking circuit?



cheers
Steve


Title: Re: Pulsed signal 60% more effective then strait DC
Post by: Login to see usernames on December 29, 2013, 19:12:33 pm
Ady,

Another member of this forum used the same setup.
WATCH HIS VIDEO ON THIS

He shows you the meters!

Steve
Title: Re: Pulsed signal 60% more effective then strait DC
Post by: Login to see usernames on December 29, 2013, 19:21:54 pm
Title: Re: Pulsed signal 60% more effective then strait DC
Post by: Login to see usernames on December 29, 2013, 20:06:14 pm
Thanks Steve!You said same power in same power out but you and the user showed more amps at the cell.When you measured  the amps at the variac after the bridge and cap the amps drawn was like at the cell?
I tried that skematic but ,nothing special hapened.I also tried the setup with a coil,a cap and 2tubes separated by 2diodes,i reached 180v on the ceramic cap but bo bubles from the tubes...
Title: Re: Pulsed signal 60% more effective then strait DC
Post by: Login to see usernames on December 29, 2013, 23:57:42 pm
Hi Adys,

Here is the setup drawing of PT.
Also attached is a video you do not see on youtube. You can see his bifilarcoil in there. Its a toroid.
My was what i send you by email.
Ill guess my email to you was not complete.
Hope you can replicate this.
Please share your results!

Steve
Title: Re: Pulsed signal 60% more effective then strait DC
Post by: Login to see usernames on December 30, 2013, 00:29:25 am
Thanks very much Steve.I will give it a try.The problem is i  did not have a large toroid like that,only  1.5cm dia ferite rods.From what i saw in his setup its more power out than in, because of the colapsing magnetic field of the coil,but for this colapsing magnetic field to take place there must be amps flowing trough the setup to create it.Stan is also showing 5A consumption on the 8xa setup.
Cheers!
Title: Re: Pulsed signal 60% more effective then strait DC
Post by: Login to see usernames on December 30, 2013, 00:45:36 am
I tuned my 100 windings of 1mm wire bifilar coil into a situation similar to PT's.
I only used less voltage into the system.
Hydrocars as well succeeded.
You will see. You can do this, Ady.

Steve
Title: Re: Pulsed signal 60% more effective then strait DC
Post by: Login to see usernames on December 30, 2013, 02:10:21 am
Thanks for the encouragement Steve,i will keep you posted.
Cheers!
Title: Re: Pulsed signal 60% more effective then strait DC
Post by: Login to see usernames on December 30, 2013, 10:34:37 am
I have an idea how he gets more power out.. he is using analog meters for pulsed signals..not showing the rms value..
Title: Re: Pulsed signal 60% more effective then strait DC
Post by: Login to see usernames on December 30, 2013, 13:02:23 pm
Steve said he used true rms meters and the result was the same
Title: Re: Pulsed signal 60% more effective then strait DC
Post by: Login to see usernames on December 31, 2013, 00:01:35 am
so there's more power out than in?
Title: Re: Pulsed signal 60% more effective then strait DC
Post by: Login to see usernames on December 31, 2013, 00:39:12 am
I didn't build the setup yet.Hidro or Steve can answer that.
Title: Re: Pulsed signal 60% more effective then strait DC
Post by: Login to see usernames on December 31, 2013, 09:41:55 am
so there's more power out than in?

did you watch the video,s?

Title: Re: Pulsed signal 60% more effective then strait DC
Post by: Login to see usernames on December 31, 2013, 14:50:35 pm
try it....
Title: Re: Pulsed signal 60% more effective then strait DC
Post by: Login to see usernames on December 31, 2013, 15:13:33 pm
ok I get it now , coil characteristics?
Title: Re: Pulsed signal 60% more effective then strait DC
Post by: Login to see usernames on December 31, 2013, 19:14:42 pm
Some with a ferriet core and bifilar winding works.
I used two different types and both worked.
1: single layer bif 1mm wire, 100 windings on 1cm diam core.
2: 0,5mm wire bif on half moon core of old tv tube.
I dont have the specs from PT, but he used higher volts, big tube, 20cm diam toroid core..

With my tests on the joulethief i found out that twisted wire bifilar works great too.

Steve
Title: Re: Pulsed signal 60% more effective then strait DC
Post by: Login to see usernames on January 06, 2014, 21:04:43 pm
I made the test today of the bifiliar setup.100t ,1mm wire  diam.and the choke made it worst,it acted like a resistor restricting half of the amps but also half of the voltage.power consumption was the same before the choke and after(0.25A).maybe i need to add some koh to make it draw more curent.
Title: Re: Pulsed signal 60% more effective then strait DC
Post by: Login to see usernames on January 06, 2014, 21:54:15 pm
Crowbar diode in place?
Crank voltage up.
In and output of the wires reversd?

Title: Re: Pulsed signal 60% more effective then strait DC
Post by: Login to see usernames on January 06, 2014, 22:00:11 pm
crowbar diode?the coil was wired out of phase like your drawind on the mail.
Title: Re: Pulsed signal 60% more effective then strait DC
Post by: Login to see usernames on January 07, 2014, 08:35:49 am
Look at the diode over the fet in pt,s schematic...
Title: Re: Pulsed signal 60% more effective then strait DC
Post by: Login to see usernames on January 07, 2014, 14:42:46 pm
I made your skematic from the mail.Pt is swiching the coil diferent.I will try that too.thanks!
Title: Re: Pulsed signal 60% more effective then strait DC
Post by: Login to see usernames on January 07, 2014, 22:16:25 pm
Adys15
Can you share the schematic?
Thank
andy
Title: Re: Pulsed signal 60% more effective then strait DC
Post by: Login to see usernames on January 07, 2014, 22:20:03 pm
its just like the 8xa setup,but instead of scr i used a mosfet