- Sep 3, 2001I like the NEO name Mark Metlica used to describe this

kind of research. All of the demonstrations with a car

alternator can be rewired within a manner of minutes.

Today I rewired one demo for a single test of the 10

KVA pole pig where the acting impedances of 4 branch

circuits essentially turns three phases into 1, in a

resonant current limiting possibility. This was torn

down after making a variation of the same idea that

instead produced 6500 volts from three 16 volt stator

inputs, in what seems to be a questionable adaptation

of a BRS to 3 phase, using ferromagnetic voltage rise

made 180 out of phase with a resonant one. So far

almost every step of the way has been another obstacle

or delusion. If it is only a mere delusion, that can

hinder research for weeks,by induced wild goose chases

caused by false assumptions: but then you can be glad

is was just a delusion and not a serious limitation,

that OBSTACLES will provide in regard to HOW REAL

COMPONENTS BEHAVE VS THE PREDICTIONS MADE BY IDEAL

COMPONENTS. We are practical inventors, not solely

theorist's where the theories of electrical branches

and their deliveries sometimes seems not worth the

toilet paper it is written on. If the components

behaved ideally Tesla like conceptions of harnessing

the very wheelwork of nature might be realized by

simply creating a spatial interaction of electric and

magnetic fields in interphased resonances. I have one

model of this and another also.{FLUX CAPACITORS)It has

taken years to even secure the requirements for the

possibilities, initially by sizing considerations

considered impossible, and then revealed as possible

where the limitations were responsible for the

formation of the possibility! So before they throw me

to the dogs for off topic postings let me get back to

what has already been done, and if you want to see it

again, get there early!

The yearly event is still on for Sat Sept 8th. The

year of being 45 is a good 9 year, so on the 8th I

will be 46. Like Tesla, I like to have festivities

near my birthday. There also being seven nines in my

HDN name, this is also Tesla's birthday, july 9th. But

my birthday is the inverse of that at 9-7-55. Now all

of this seems irrevalent and severely off topic, but I

also wish to indicate that some of my interests

intersecting with tesla coiling, also intersect with

deceased individuals we might also call "Tesla

Prototypes." One of these is Andrija Puharic, who

purportedly belonged to a cult of nines. Now Puharich

also specified a patent of high frequency water

electrolysis where he names a 3rd harmonic tetrahedral

resonant frequency of 32,800 some hz or so.

Quite beyond belief, and what I was trying to show by

scope input at last years event was the standing wave

length set up that will produce a scope registered

31,250 hz. Contrary to the popular assertations made

by status quo belief correctly pointed out that a

solenoidal single winded tesla secondary will ALWAYS

have a resonant frequency HIGHER than that given by

quarter wavelength considerations. I can perfectly

agree with this assesment here, and have made tests on

my own secondary of inneficient design that indicate

even a higher than expected resonant frequency. This

far too off topic to continue as I am only back

editing this for a posting that is already far too

long. But I have to make a point in context, with what

I claimed last year, that positively did not work,

and that was a method of determining a resonant

frequency of a coil/ by electrostatic or changing

electric fields in space and time method. Apparently

that method only works with coils of a certain gauge

wire, because it more involves surface areas. The

smaller tight curvatures of fine gauge wire of a

typical tesla secondary do not respond to this method.

However if those secondaries instead were given the

magnetic induction influence of being placed near the

high induction coils causing the high freq effect:

than I think that they would register their natural

resonant frequency to an oscilloscope quite easily:

given the fact that the 25 pf scope internal

capacitance is also often the top load capacity chosen

for a medium size tesla coil.

Other things aside I have prepared a more spectacular

demonstration of this electric field effect this year.

This is a LONGITUDINAL extraction of induction

conversion by changing electric field in space, via

intermediary of a magnetic ferrite core. My thesis is

that preliminary investigations of only a longshot

racetrack guess of a resonant frequency of a ferrite

magnetized material can start out about as a

guestimate as 25/1 reduction reduction from 1/4

wavelength value indicated by what former testings at

60 hz have delivered. There is nothing wrong with

saying that an air core solenoid will have a higher

than quarterwavelength value of resonant frequency.

But there are also MANY unconventional geometric

designs where the opposite effect is noted where the

resonant frequency is INSTEAD LOWERED from the the

quarterwavelength value. Knowing the influence of

geometry of windings is essential in that something

requiring a picnic table of coils producing a

desirable low resonant frequency can also be produced

with much lower q by a coil that you can hold in the

palm of your hand! This is a square coil That I was

told came out of a microwave oven: I SURE WOULD LIKE

TO HAVE MORE OF THESE, If anyone knows where these

specially wound coils can be bought, sold or ransomed!

This(low resonant frequency) may not be desirable in

the art of tesla coiling, but to other hitherto

unpractical undiscovered industrial applications this

may become IMMEDIATELY PRACTICAL. Of relevance in this

case for high frequency electrolysis is the production

of a electrical standing wave of the astoundingly low

frequency of 31,250 hz. The first thing a tesla coiler

would know is that it would have to be a astoundingly

long length of wire. By quarterwavelength

considerations it would have to be about 7500 ft. By

reducing the resonant frequency via use of multi

layered turns of 14 gauge coils this can be reduced

to 5000 feet. These are exactly the open ended natural

resonant frequencies produced from my alternator 3

phase DSR= DELTA SERIES RESONANCES. As Tesla might

say, here we have 3 phases of source frequency

resonance inposed on a collection of 31,250 hz

resonators. However those resonators do not have the

freedom of vibration to vibrate at their natural

resonant frequency, because, not understanding the

nature and solution of catastrophic resonant

circuits,(CRC): their application is being served as a

resonator of the source frequency. Understanding the

solution to the CRC problem entails that a short, or

modified forms of a short, between the generated

resonant potentials will always prevent it from

becoming a catastrophic amperage demand made by open

midpoint loads of the DSR's. What this means is that a

CRC can be relatively inexpensively put behind the

DSR's that normally vibrate at 31,250 hz, and then the

endings of those coils can be attached to 3 sets of

plates which are actually 3 sets of electrolysisor

plates. When water is poured in the bottom of this

electrolysisor, connecting all the plates it

establishes the precondition of establishing the

semblance of a short as an internal load, which keeps

the (new)outer DSR from demanding a catastrophic

amount of current. As we fill this vessel, at a

certain amount of water volume, the counterpart of

capacitive reactance inherent as a component of that

acting short will balance the requirements of needed

capacitance for that 150 mh comparatively high

inductance that creates the 31,250 hz standing wave.

In fact given the dimensions of the present vessel,

and the acting dielectric constant of water at 40, it

is even possible to predict how far the water will

fill the vessel before this kind of resonance is

achieved. Given the fact that at this input frequency

of 480 hz already tends to easily emit sound

vibrations of a high ringing intensity, these

combinations of this with a water capacitor eerily

reminds ones of Ernest Worrel Keeley's somewhat's

mythical work in this regard. In any case I have gone

severely off topic, so I hope Terry will allow this

long post now returning to the original subject.

{NOTE; the following falls under DELUSION, and not

OBSTACLE, where a delusion implies an obstacle of our

own making}

Tests conducted today indicate it should be (might

be)feasible to offer the alternator inputs routed to a

10 KVA pole pig to run a TESLA PRIMARY. Any coiler

wishing to try this is welcome to, but I would suggest

using my 10 kva pole pig. This is because the

necessity of using all 3 phases for power input,

combined into one phase of application actually

consists of a three phase power correction circuit,

where the reactance of the (transformer)primary load

will be factored into the equation. It might be

possible to simply plug things into the system using

your own step up transformer, but then the resonant

ballasting might be off.

Most folks understand that a neon transformer is

current limited on the secondary. REMARKABLY OR

PERHAPS EITHER BENEFICIAL OR DETRIMENTAL, the way this

pole pig is current limited by resonant ballasting, if

you place a short on the secondary, the primary

voltage input will go to (near)zero but the amount of

primary current inputed will remain the same as the

current limiting value established by impedance. This

should insure the actions of a quenched gap.

However I am unsure whether the car alternator will

be able to deliver the voltages for a primary arc gap,

and whether the input current requirements will be

high enough. So I will quickly calculate these to see

if anyone can make comments whether it should be

realistic to expect these levels to power a tesla

primary. {After punching thes no.s out, I see that it

is not feasible with a car alternator @ 480 hz 3

phase, because of the low amount of power that could

be inputed with this plan}

The highest practical output of the alternator is 40

volts. The current limiting will be that of 33 mh @

480 hz, so for a 40 volt input, the X(L) quantity(can

be estimated as Z) at 6.28*480*.033= 99.4 ohms. This

should allow only 400 ma to primary, with also a

reduction of voltage at the primary to a predicted

40*.026/.033= 31.5 volts across primary, making a 62.5

voltage gain for only 1968 volts for primary arcing,

but only a possible meager reactive power input of

12.6 watts! So after hammering out these figures I can

see that the use of 14 gauge 500 ft spools for

resonant balancing to be prohibitive. I will instead

say that unless a set of 4 low resistance inductors

with appropriate large capacities to resonate @ 480 hz

are obtained, the possibilities of a 480 hz car

alternator powered tesla coil are impossible with this

scheme. Instead I will reconsider what a 80 volt input

@ 360 hz from the monster bus alternators can deliver.

If this is worthy of possibility, it will be done with

the four 11 mh values.

The way such a scheme would work has been tested for

neon secondary loads,(@ 480 hz car alternator input)

which can actually show a power factor correction. We

ordinarily would suspect such a thing to be

impossible, since power factor correction normally

applies only to reactive loads. To speculate how a

reactance is involved also implies that of its

transformer connection, so we can speculate that the

current limited primary sees a reduction of its

inherent impedance measured at open load, when instead

the secondary is shorted by an unballasted neon

discharge load. The current limiting factor occurs not

on the secondary but by the input primary side. A test

today showing the principle records a 15.8 ma stator

delta supply line,(there are 3 of these), but a 92 ma

input to primary lighting the 4 inch neon on secondary

of pole pig.

What is done is the following; three delta series

resonances are constructed as the initial delta loads.

A normal consideration in placing those loads is that

it will be able to hold the amperage they will conduct

at series resonance. However that situation does not

have to exist, providing that we are not using a

series resonance. The conversion factor becomes the

fact that if all three resonances are equal, we can

connect all the middle points in the (DSR)= delta

series resonant) circuits as an inner triangle, and

this will convert the resonances into three tank

circuits connected in wye, where the total circuit

then draws q squared times less current, with q amount

of current internal to the tank circuits, which shows

the resonant rise of amperage with regard to that

inputed, vs that obtained internally in the circuit.

This is the real world actions of real tank circuits,

and how they act in reality when RESONATED AT THE

SOURCE FREQUENCY. A tesla primary tank circuit doesnt

quite fit the mold there, BECAUSE THAT CIRCUIT IS NOT

BASED ON A RESONANCE OBTAINED FROM THE SOURCE

FREQUENCY, but rather at the (MUCH)higher frequency of

the secondary it intends to resonate. The system of 14

gauge coils used to gain resonant voltage rise(BY

BEING RESONANT TO THE SOURCE FREQUENCY) consists of 3

phases of .15 henry, 12.5 ohms. By using .75 uf for

resonance, it can deliver a 26 fold rise of voltage to

another resonance, consisting of high induction coils

themselves providing a further 6 fold voltage rise. A

working 150 q voltage gain can be accomplished in this

manner. By using a resonance within a resonance to

provide voltage gain only works if the resistance of

the inner system is high compared to the outer. In

fact the idea led to the creation of making 180 phased

systems out of three 120 degree phased inputs. By

placing a resonance between two 120 degree phased

resonant inputs, we have itself phase shifted that

resonance 60 degrees between them. We can take the

remaining delta series resonance, and disconnect it

and instead hook up the 62.5/1 voltage gain provided

by ferromagnetic pig pole transformer. Its secondaries

in turn can resonate one of the high induction coils.

Each of these (two) high induction coils will have a

voltage rise 180 out of phase with each other. I have

a demo set up showing about 6500 volts created in this

manner, for three 16 volt stator inputs. The

plexiglass capacitors emit a high pitched ringing

noise, possibly a third harmopnic of the 480 hz input.

It is this same idea of combining 3 phases into 1 that

led to the idea of getting rid of the high induction

coils, whose resistance is prohibitive for pole pig

primary current limiting, and instead I merely added a

single 14 gauge coil @ 11 mh using 7 uf for its

capacitance, between the resonant midpoints of two of

the outer delta series resonances. From there one of

the primaries of the pole pig were attached, and the

other attached to the remaining DSR midpoint. We have

now created a current limited pole pig transformer,

whose voltage input will also drop to near zero, if we

short out its secondary. The current limiting factor

becomes the impedances of the outer delta resonances,

which have been turned into tank circuits, by the

addition of two inner pathways as virtual impedance

shorts across the series resonances.

What becomes somewhat problematic is the differences

of resonant q values. The existing DSR set up will

deliver a q voltage rise of @26 (appearently using

only one midpoint pathway dramatically increases that

factor)for series resonance, but only 14.6 for tank

resonance. This means that 14.6 times less current

will enter the circuit from the delta supply lines,

than exist inside it, and this is experimentally

recorded. When we add the reactance of an empty loaded

pig secondary to this circuit as the interior resonant

load, its input primary voltage will be determined by

the impedance that source sees. This corresponds to

observations that the impedance of the 10 KVA pole pig

primary is ~ 280 ohms @ 480 hz input.(A cited 360%

deviance @ 480 Hz that occurs using a real

component,vs reactive calculations made using the

Ideal acting values it should deliver by formula) vs

the The impedance of a .15 henry phase is

6.28*480*.15= 452.1 ohms This is a ratio of .619. This

same ~ratio of input stator voltage distribution

occurs on the pig primary, prior to neon firing on

secondary, where its impedance appears as that of a

primary with open secondary. Thus a 16 volt stator

will then distribute 10 of the 16 across the pole pig

primary. About 17 or 18 volts stator the neon will

fire, and the impedance the outer resonant coils see

as an internal load will have completely changed,

where when across the pig primary it reaches about 11

volts producing an instant drop to 3 volts upon neon

firing. From there increasing the stator voltage will

not signicantly draw any more amperage from the stator

delta supply lines, instead the increasing amperage

with increasing voltage input occurs only on the pole

pig primary, and increased neon display. The very

unusual display of increasing tank q with increasing

voltage application is (initially without considering

all parameters)evidently made, where the situation is

normally the reverse! The 3 volt input to primary

firing a 4 inch neon on secondary will also remain at

that level, even though the outside stator voltage

goes up many times that value( by a variac rectified

DC input to field control) It is that situation that

shows the ample need for a separate tuning for 3 phase

tank wye resonance. I have done this before for a 188

hz shorted DSR where I think using LTR caps were used

for to make a better tank resonance. In any case upon

neon bulb firing, the impedance change the circuit

sees indicates that the load has made it appear as an

~ 3 fold decreased impedance. Here is where the

inductance comparisons appear to apply as the primary

inductance at 26 mh is roughly 1/6th of the DSR phase

inductance of .15 henry, and when the bulb first fires

the pig primary voltage will be reduced to that about

1/6th that present on the stator. So from these

considerations it should be understood that if a

tuning were made to find the best capacities to be

used for tank circuit shorts, that will not in itself

be the best tuning to be used when instead we make the

load, not a short, but the reduced impedance present

on a primary loading a secondary neon as short. The

best capacities for one situation, may not be the best

for a different impedance load, which is the whole

business of power factor correction to begin with.

Having made a tuning based on shorts, it should be

recognized that adding the slightly inductive

reactance of neon secondary discharge as a load to

that tuning means that the former tuning now has

slightly more inductive reactance than its balanced

amount of capacitive reactance, therefore more

capacitive reactance would need to be added or the

capacity must be reduced. This also correlates with

the fact that adding 1/6th more inductance to the

DSR,(that factor added in by adding the inductance of

the pole pig primary) would mean using 1/6th less

capacity, and these would be the kind of power factor

corrections that would be needed, depending on WHAT

KIND OF REACTANCE THE POLE PIG SECONDARY SEES!

In fact as we should all know, because the LC tank

(tesla)primary is designed for a much higher than

input frequency of resonance, the reactance it sees at

the actual source frequency is practically all

capacitive reactance(prior to actual arcing).

Therefore that capacity used in the tesla primary

initially needs to be placed solely on the pole pig

secondary, and the amperage draw on primary noted.

This is totally necessary to determine possible

deviations that real components will deliver vs the

values determined by formula. To illustrate;At 480 hz

the deviations real components can deliver have

included

1) a 360% increase of actual impedance of pole pig

reactance vs that determined by formula.

2) a 60% increase of actual impedance of ~58-60 henry

air core coils vs that determined by formula

3) a 6% variance in plate capacitive reactances

determined by formula vs actual reactances.

Once one ascertains the actual capacitive reactance as

a real component,one is further along in the ball

game. This also indicates that the modeling of a small

length neon plasma secondary (unballasted from that

end)discharge as to what might occur if a tesla

primary tank discharge were instead present to be

possibly entirely erroneous! Instead that reactive

load the pig primary would see on its secondary would

be primarily capacitive. This might be even better

modeled by placing that capacity in parallel to the 4

inch neon, and then noting the primary input

impedance, as a result of the voltage present on that

primary, by this means of resonant to input frequency

primary ballasting.

The logic behind this follows from the facts that by

making no adjustment of capacities on the outer DSR,

and adding a inductive reactance modeled as a

secondary neon discharge from the primary, as an

internal load to that system, the resonant q of

amperage rise with respect to the delta supply line

input amperages was decreased from 14.6 to 7.5 (with

100 ma internal amperage to pole pig primary, one of

the Delta supply lines will contain 7.5 times less

amperage as exists inside the pole pig primary, where

paradoxically the increased voltage levels at stator

will seemingly show an increasing q factor, depending

on what voltage is inputed. To counter this gain is

the fact that the ratio of voltage distribution to the

pole pig primary, vs that present on the alternator

stator will also decrease at the same time the amount

of resonant rise of amperage increases. Thus it may be

entirely inaccurate to say the q is actually

increasing with increased voltage application, but

that might be the initial impression of observing the

resonant ampearage rise without completely analysing

all the aspects) Had an actual power factor correction

been attempted, where the capacity were reduced to

allow for the increased inductive reactance present as

that internal reactance load, the q reduction from

14.6 to 7.5 might not have been so reduced.

To end this long winded speculation, the speculations

are only that, but are necessary to ascertain or

predict the given actual circuit conditions and what

will happen in that operation. To begin with it is

doubtful any one would design such a 3 phase circuit,

without first noting the midpoint interactions of a

DSR resonant midpoint interaction. Such a circuit

using only 11 mh on the 4 legs as I have outlined with

a 40 volt alternator input represents a potentially

CATASTROPHIC RESONANT CIRCUIT. Somewhat unusual in

this application is the fact that it is safe to allow

a short across the secondaries, but it is NOT SAFE to

allow the pole pig primary to ever become unconnected

as a load. If this were to happen one of the phases

would then become series resonant, producing an

amperage demand of 40/1.25 ohms or 32 amps! Another

(possible)reason such a thing would never be sensibly

attempted is the fact that without knowing that a

midpoint short itself (on 3 equally valued DS

resonances)causes a conversion from series to tank

resonance, the causitive factor itself that can

prevent such a catastrophic resonance would not be

initially understood. It is somewhat initially

baffling to know that given two different options of

DSR maximum amperage consumption vs that of a parallel

path option of q squared times more impedance to

input, that the voltage source will always take a

current path chosen by the highest impedance option!

This is so far universally proven in my testings, but

only on the first stage in a multistaged system where

on the second stage some contradictions to that fact

seem to exist.

To try and finally conclude here, if such a capacitive

reactance made by secondary pole pig connection is

noted as a reactive impedance on the primary the power

factor correction made by introduction of inductive

impedances added to primary as a current limiting

factor, CAN ALSO INCLUDE THE NET REACTANCE ADDED BY

THE INTERNAL LOAD AS EVIDENCED BY PRIMARY CONSUMPTION.

Therefore it is suspected the new scenario of a tesla

primary tank circuit consisting of primarily a

capacitive reactance loading upon the input frequency

will mean that instead of capacity being subtracted

from the DSR's to procur the needed condition of

increasing the capacitive reactance to counter the

addition of inductive reactance, which ocurrs on the

case of an unballasted neon secondary load, INSTEAD

THE OPPOSITE CONSIDERATION is in order. This will mean

less capacitive, and not more capacitive reactance

needs to be added to the DSR's to be resonant for the

entire load. This translates as a greater required

capacitance than exists on the DSR in a short tuned

system will then be required. One of the initial

stumbling blocks in reactance terminology can

initially be noted that reactance is expressed in

ohms, and the converse relationship in capacitive

reactance is where a higher reactance value,(ohmic)

actually means a lower valued capacity is required to

fulfill the increased ohmic value. Here an extra

(net)capacitive reactance viewed from the source

frequency is being added by introduction of a tesla

primary tank circuit on secondary of transformer.

Manipulations and testing of the circuit can determine

the best acting q resonant rises of amperage internal

to the circuit available by reactance cancellation,

for conditions of trisectional short of DSR. This then

implies that Larger than Resonant,(LTR) capacity

values, that supply less than capacitive reactance

ohmic values need to be used for this form of RESONANT

PRIMARY INPUT IMPEDANCE BALLASTING, or more properly

put current limiting on that unballasted transformer.

I encourage other theorists to more accurately

describe these things in better electrical

terminologies than I have done here, where I have

somewhat confused the terms "ballasting" and "current

limiting of primary" Perhaps Jim Lux or someone well

versed in electrical terminology can more accurately

point out the more technical differences between the

usages of these terms as I have confused them to be

somewhat analogous here. I think perhaps the

difference here is that the term "ballasting" more

properly applies to a current limiting made on

secondary of transformer, rather than what I am

describing where it is accomplished on the primary.

In this circumstance I have also tried the

CONVENTIONAL approach of placing capacities across the

primary itself, to accomplish this theoretical power

factor correction, rather than changing the cap values

of the external DSR's to compensate. Ferromagnetic

transformer components simply do not have the ability

to offer good power factor corrections, that air core

, low resistance/comparably high inductance coils can

provide. The conventional approach did not deliver the

expected results, or could only be harmoniously

combined with the existing DSR to deliver a worse

performance, than if they were never included. This is

why the conventional approach is abandoned in this

instance, as when it was tried in a single test, the

neon secondary discharge could only be accomplished,

(also)with less eficiency by doing exactly opposite of

what would be suspected, by placing the desired

capacity in series, and not parallel. Including these

types of(air core) coils for current limiting of a

pole pig primary increases the ability of the circuit

to counter the (lower q tank resonant amperage rises)

inherent in a purely ferromagnetic approach. This

opportunity is generally not grasped with 60 hz

applications because of cost and corespondingly huge

capacities that would have to be employed with 60 hz

resonances. However with the input of higher

frequencies available with alternator inputs, this

becomes immediately a practical application and

option.

I will dig up a past reference on tesla list

concerning the ability of a series resonant voltage

gain to respond equally as a resonant amperage

gain,where it does not, showing that indeed the same

kind of effects are also found in single phased

resonant circuits. I dont have that actual posting

available as URL, but I will rename it series res. vs

tank res. gain to show what has been already stated.

Sincerely HDN

http://www.egroups.com/group/teslafy

=====

Binary Resonant System http://members3.boardhost.com/teslafy/

__________________________________________________

Do You Yahoo!?

Get email alerts & NEW webcam video instant messaging with Yahoo! Messenger

http://im.yahoo.com - Next post in topic >>