Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

RE: [teslafy] 2nd Parameter of Conrol

Expand Messages
  • Harvey Norris
    ... Back after several days abscense... Concerning the stator-field feedback loop, it is well possible to take a single phase of three unergized field stator
    Message 1 of 3 , Sep 13, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      --- John Johnson <kamikazebear@...> wrote:

      >
      > Wild thought but if that level of build up was
      > allowed to develop to a near critical point
      > and the precise optimal level was known,
      > it should be possible to use solidstate
      > microswitching to mantain that level
      > so you have a good feedback loop
      > and leaked off the excess to be used
      > in an external load.
      Back after several days abscense...
      Concerning the stator-field feedback loop, it is well
      possible to take a single phase of three unergized
      field stator phases, rectify it with diodes, and send
      the output to field. In this case however it causes a
      "runaway" effect, where the cause of the the rotating
      electromagnets magnetism, is obtained from the effect
      of electrical stator current it produces, and a
      runaway magnetic chain reaction happens in less then a
      second. The field and stator however have limits known
      as saturation, where current beyond a certain point
      produces a law of diminishing returns. Only so much
      amperage can be used to excite the field, beyond which
      any additional amperage forced through the field will
      have little corresponding increase in stator voltages
      produced. This effect of field saturation (at top
      end, where an additional rotational saturation effect
      takes place at the bottom end)however is not a static
      value at all, it is directly dependent on the rpm of
      the field rotor... So at operation at lower rpm, the
      necessary amount of field amperage to obtain a certain
      output is higher then operation at a higher rpm, and
      generally the higher the rpm, the less the field
      energy requirements. The metallic rotation of the
      field rotor itself appears to cause a "rotational
      magnetism", that not only appears to reduce the fields
      energy requirements, it will actually fight its
      influence up to a certain point. What this means is
      that when we initially attempt to energize the field
      with small currents, a sort of back emf appears that
      opposes the fwd voltage of the fields energizing
      source. The net result of this is that when we take
      ohms law readings for the field, the resistance of the
      fields windings actually appears far more higher then
      its resistance measured without rotation. The field
      amperage we input up to its rotational saturation
      barrier represents the electromagnets effort to make a
      magnetic field in excess to the prexistant magnetic
      field already in place by rotation. Although the
      direction of both efforts can be made in unison;
      (actually the field amperages magnetic field can be
      made in opposition to its rotational influence, making
      for a less efficent operation also which is why there
      is a "correct" polarity designation for field input
      wires, which the "wrong" field wiring theoretically
      should increase the rotaional barriers amperage
      point): even though the effects of both influences are
      made for unison, the electromagnets field does not
      signifiacntly increase the stators output until the
      point that the effect of the electromagnets magnetic
      field begins to surpass the effect of the roational
      magnetic field. What this translates to is for my
      case at 480 hz operation, is that until .25 A is
      passing through the field, no great stator increase is
      noted. What this also means is that the source of any
      field self feedback loop isnt going to start this
      magnetic chain reaction until the point where the
      feedback field currents start exceeding .25A. If we
      short out a stator phase without the field being
      energized we can obtain .75 A for this case, which is
      enough current to start the chain reaction, but due to
      the losses involved with diodes, the DC parametric
      short becomes a third of an amp, which is still enough
      to start the reaction. To "CONTROL" this chain
      reaction however, we need a device that will limit the
      voltage across the field, so that it isnt recieving
      the voltage present at the actual stator output.

      Now the three METR spirals in three phase resonance,
      if we short out the three midpoints of voltage rise,
      this changes the entire three series resonanaces into
      three parallel resonances, provided all the resonances
      are identical action. In this circumstance there is Q
      times more amperage in the phases, then is being
      inputed by the stator line division of currents into
      the phases. When we work with resonant electrolysis
      schemes, we realize that ideally we wish the
      elecrolysis vessel to closely resemble the actions of
      a short. The single ruler set size cell is a far cry
      from that ideal. But again the more draw we obtain
      from the METR midpoint connections of resonant voltage
      rise, the more the circuit starts acting as a tank
      circuit, experiencing resonant rise of amperage. Now
      the cells requirements are that it is sourced from
      only two sets of 4 way rectifiers placed across two of
      the three inner voltage points. If we were to add the
      third one, this does not increase the output, because
      topologically two sets already do what three do, so
      the third set is redundant. Now suppose we set up the
      third set anyways, and just monitor its open circuit
      DC voltage. We find that this voltage is limited by
      the amount of voltage present on the water cell, since
      it is on a parallel circuit. I was able to actually
      put a small DC motor on the third set and get it to
      move, even though its stator source was created from
      an unenergized field. This in turn drops both the
      third sets DC measured open circuit voltage, and the
      voltage across the electrode assembly. Now imagine we
      instead send that third sets DC voltage and amperage
      back to the field. It initially has a higher voltage
      then what the stator voltage contains, PROVIDED THE
      PARALLEL WATER CELL IS EMPTY AT THAT POINT. As soon
      as the runaway field conditions begin to make the
      stator go overload, we pour the water into the cell.
      We are using water to control a magnetic chain
      reaction. This then correspondingly reduces the
      voltage on the field self feedback loop. Now because
      we have drawn extra amperage from the inner triangle,
      we have also done something unexpected, we have made
      the circuit act more as a three phase tank circuit.
      The actual field amperage is being rectified from a
      source of resonant amperage creation, which also might
      be interpreted as saying we have made a power factor
      correction on the DC field itself, something normally
      considered impossible with DC, but here since the DC
      is initially obtained from AC before rectification, if
      that AC is made to appear with a higher Q factor for
      creating resonant amperage increase by the addition of
      the load demand of the field, the corresponding amount
      of stator delivery amperage being rerouted to field is
      also reduced ratio wise. We are actually then making
      the circuit appear MORE efficient, by adding the draw
      made by the self feedback loop, where it is obtaining
      its amperage demand from a resonant rise of amperage
      principle. In fact if all these principles hold valid,
      in the workings of this self feedback loop means that
      the amount of water in the cell will regulate what
      voltage appears across the cell. This is because it is
      the amount of water across the plates that determines
      how much voltage reduction takes place. In the case
      here with a single cell test, 31 volts can be across
      the stator, but only 6 volts is across the cell. A
      comparison of the field demand wattage compared to the
      water cells wattage output is at this operation level,
      the field only needs to take 1/20th of the energy used
      by the water cell, to satisfy its demand to create
      those conditions. So we think that 1/20th less output
      would take place across the water cell if this extra
      rerouting of output were to take place. But this does
      not look at the total picture, because this very
      rerouting action of resonant amperage creation ALSO
      should make the tank delivery more efficient!

      Well enough of theory for now, it is just better to do
      it, instead of just talking about it, so I will be
      back soon.
      HDN


      =====
      Tesla Research Group; Pioneering the Applications of Interphasal Resonances http://groups.yahoo.com/group/teslafy/
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.