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

Problems of Division

Expand Messages
  • Harvey D Norris
    This has been a re-currect theme. Apparently it is near impossible to divide something into two. For the first case scenario, a capacitive value may show equal
    Message 1 of 1 , Feb 3, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      This has been a re-currect theme.
      Apparently it is near impossible to divide something into two.

      For the first case scenario, a capacitive value may show equal values by LCR meter within a half of a % or so, but when we put a total voltage across both equal values in series, one side will get more voltage then the other in the division, implying that things aren't being divided equally.

      I worked with this problem a bit and could show a better division and equalization of voltages that should be equivalent, but the crux of the biscuit there was showing the difference between the ordinary tank circuit and the binary resonant one. In the binary case, the voltage difference between capacitors in series are more equalized.

      In the next case scenario this same effect takes place between mutual inductance between equally valued air core inductances in close proximity. The mutual inductance will also yield an inherent inbalance in most all cases, but this thought should be elucidated upon for example.

      I have taken two of the 12 lb, 23 gauge coils placed on a inverted cylindrical holder at 1 inch separation of poles as shown on video, and made impedance measurements of both when the coils are either in magnetic agreement or opposition. AT 30 volts AC variac input tests of inductive reactance amperage consumptions can be made with both sides. The problem becomes that even though the inductive values are well equally matched, even in reactive only tests of mutual induction by this air core means; when they are placed in mutual induction the measured inductive value between them brought forth by that mutual induction always seems to make one side stronger than the other. This is especially true when the pair is tuned for magnetic opposition vs a tuning made with magnetic unity.

      To illustrate this somewhat initial paradox that later becomes revealed as to its nature, today I set each coil system in magnetic unity as the other unexplored side of the coin. Instead of placing them as inversely phased series resonances, I placed them as identically phased series resonances in parallel and mutual inductance. Days ago I found out that the circuits magnetically are the same as far as interactions go. Two magnetic reversals of circuits connections can be made, and it is the same as the original arrangement. Thus here we are only replicating the same magnetic circumstances for comparisons of both cases, to look for possible differences between both cases that might exist.

      The placing of these ~ series resonant circuits with identical phasing direction from inputs then can be measured for mutual induction, and then no confusion results from the observations, and then we replicate the same result by double negatives.

      The double negative then only involves first turning one LC series combination in parallel with the other to appear in reverse as concerns its electrical connections, and then doing the same thing to the coil itself.

      In each of these combinations the effect of mutual inductance shows that a higher q factor is obtained on each individual coil when the fields are in opposition, but because precise measurements are not yet made, this is not yet conclusive.

      In this experimentation with the smaller ~ 2.5 H coils, the value of capacity is set at 3 uf, and the mutual inductance of the coils is varied to meet that capacitive balance.

      So having investigated the usual arrangement for the first time I was quite surprised to find that that balance between the coils in this arrangement was superb. At 30 VAC variac input, the coils in magnetic agreement; in identical and not inversely phased resonance as usually dealt with; these values yielded 114 ma on one side and 116 ma on the other, less then 2 % difference. But when their individual reactances themselves were measured a larger % of difference was recorded, and since each reactance in parallel is using the same capacitive value to resonate, this implies that one side is aiding the other to become identical in resonant amperage consumptions. In this case even though the amperage consumptions on both side are near identical near 2% with resistances probably closer then that in tolerances, when we compare the individual voltage rises on each side of this identically phased arrangement, we find 90 volts resonant rise of voltage on one side, and 120 on the other. At first this seems puzzling since both of these voltage rises were obtained by the resonant balancing principle of series resonance with near 2% equal values on each side, but now the balance scale has significantly been tilted by mutual induction. One coil will always be predominant in (resonant air core) mutual induction so that it acts as the sender, and the other as the receiver.

      As such this begins the deScriptions of the

    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.