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

Comparisons of 2 wire Air Core Tranformer to 5 wire 3 phase Delivery

Expand Messages
  • harvich
    The first thing to be noted is that it seems likely the transformer air core model, made by removing all three phase inputs connecting the resonant
    Message 1 of 1 , May 19, 2002
      The first thing to be noted is that it seems likely the transformer
      air core model, made by removing all three phase inputs connecting
      the resonant interphasing A figure, and only leaving intact the two
      DSR1 stator lines, might have its performance improved upon by using
      different C values. This was confirmed to be the opposite case, and
      it seems that this combination works good for 2 wire, but instead the
      5 wire delivery might be improved upon by using a smaller C1 value.
      These tests can be compared for 5 wire operation vs 2.

      Henceforth the two methods will be referred to as 5 wire , or 2 wire.
      The 2 wire model is strictly voltage derived on the secondary end as
      a very unusual air core transformer, with 60 henry secondary of
      20,000 winds of 23 gauge wire of 1000 ohms resistance in series with
      its resonant capacity. This is refered to as L2C2. This capacity may
      be slightly higher than what is actually the best tuned reactance for
      the high induction coil. Some tunings have been made in haste without
      according for the differences in stator input voltages that do occur,
      as for the parametric testings,(no field input) the stator voltage
      will be slightly higher for a capacitive load reactance measurement
      vs that of a inductive. These equal current reactance tests are
      necessary to verify that the best condtions for resonance are
      occuring, but again as I have noted, even if the reactance currents
      are measured to be equal, this does not account for the voltage
      changes of the source stator and the resonance is therefore not
      perfectly tuned by merely noting equal currents if the impressed
      voltages for each case are also not equal. In one testing where the
      reactances may have been more identically matched the net results of
      current and voltage in L2C2 were lower than what the original
      measurents yeild at 3.6 ma, for the 5 wire method where L2C2 is tuned
      for resonance. Thus a small amount of capacity is added to that side
      to account for the magnetic opposition method, where on the primary
      side L1C1, C1 also increases its capacity to be resonant when brought
      into magnetic opposition with the coil of L2C2, but by a much larger
      margin where this increase is from 10 uf to a measured 14.14 uf made
      by arbitrary selection on initial tunings.

      DSR1 consists of 10.8 mh @1 ohm given a capacity for resonance,
      designated as the primary L1C1, which for the 2 wire method consists
      of the sole stator connections to altenator. However for the 5 wire
      method, this no longer becomes an air core transformer, as that
      secondary part then has 3 phase stator connections added for its
      function. L2C2 is refered to as an interphasing as the horizontal
      path on an A figure, With the endings of the A attached to 3 stator
      inputs, where the diagonals represent two larger DSR's, (delta series
      resonances), of ohmic and inductive resonances of .15 Henry and 12
      ohms, where the interphasing branch refered to as L2C2 is that which
      bisects the two DSR2's at their midpoints between the LC series,
      where when the DSR1 is added as the bottom branch across the A
      figure that C1 value varies for its best usage , which is made to
      vary according the reaction of the mutual induction with the coil of
      L2C2. In the 5 wire method an actual voltage appears across the
      interphasing from the resonant voltage rise present in each opposite
      120 degree DSR2 voltage rise, and this can either be increased by
      using magnetic unison with DSR1 mutual induction, or decreased by
      magnetic opposition. Paradoxically the magnetic opposition method is
      preferred, because it also produces a higher internal voltage rise in
      its actual interphased L2C2 branch, than what the magnetic unison
      method itself can make. From that point the three DSR2 wires can be
      removed from stator for DSR1 2 wire operation and the internal
      voltage will go a little higher on L2C2 internally for a 3.9 ma
      consumption, however little voltage than appears on the OUTSIDE
      MIDPT interphase voltage measurement.

      Making this 3 wire stator disconnection then leaves three open
      connections on the A. Shorting two of these produces no bulb L2C2
      dimunition, but three starts to dim the bulb. These open connections
      measure about 2 volts themselves, near identical to the stator input.
      This implies that the air core model shows that the secondary has a
      induction on it from DSR1 that can produce a voltage on those ends
      before we even connect them to the alternator, and most logically in
      the best method, this voltage is in a orientation to oppose the
      stator voltage. The net result of this arrangement is that DSR2's act
      with BOTH the characteristics of a series resonant circuit delivering
      (reduced) voltage rise, but also with a reduced actual amperage input
      to the resonance, showing the resonant rise of amperage in a loop, vs
      that being inputed. Initial parametric measurements in this regard
      were that a measured DSR2 conduction made with DSR1 disabled shows
      120 ma, where presumably then the top A connection wire to stator
      from that junction will read 1.7*120 ma = 204 ma. However after DSR1
      is turned on for opposition, the current goes down to 60 ma delivery
      from that stator line to junction, and the individual DSR2 amperage
      measurements do not go down 1.7 fold, but also read 60 ma. The
      overall point here is that even when DSR2 is added to the system, for
      5 wire delivery, (note the peak of the DSR2 A is served by a single
      stator wire, making 5 stator wire connections total), that addition
      does not draw significant extra energy from the alternator, noted by
      comparisons of where the amperage draws on these phases are noted. In
      parametric condtion DSR1 has 5 times the amperage draw than the
      measured DSR2 branch, but also that branch has its input amput
      amperage from stator lines themselves reduced 1.7 fold. These are
      only preliminary measurements, where if errors are noted from future
      tests , this will be noted.

      The important thing noted on 2 wire operation is that the
      interphasing connections to DSR2 outer phasings must be kept intact
      for L2C2 currents to develope. The "secondary" must use those end
      connections for the avalable free electrons for oscillation between
      them, which occurs on the L2C2 pathways. Disabling that connection
      disables those currents. Also the tuning is not as broad as in the 5
      wire model, and picking up the DSR1coil will quickly extinguish the
      neon discharge.

      Todays parametric tests showed for data records as follows;
      Meters are reconnected after making TC primary arc gap tests at
      presumed 200,000 hz by using a .6 mh primary of mega Speaker (tight
      wound) spiral. Secondary showed no action. Amperage meter on DSR1 was
      left intact, and no rf effects of the primary amperage metering were
      seen with operation of arc gap. There seems to be a problem with the
      higher voltage stator input voltages increasing the frequency of
      arcing at gap and higher voltages producing higher then desired break
      rates, somewhat remedied by a opening these smaller gaps. Undoubtably
      the increase of frequency at 480 hz makes arc gaps function
      correspondingly more efficiently for compared to that what 60 hz
      will deliver. This arc gap testing was done with 2 wire model.
      TC work will continue later.

      Stator voltage Meter added to make reactance amperage tests on DSR1,
      On 2 wire model, thus DSR2 only then supplies a Lenz law reaction on
      DSR1 consumptions, BUT reversing DSR1 coil connections HAS NO
      DIFFERENCE of that Lenz law reaction in this case. It does HAVE a
      significant difference for the 5 wire case where then we are reacting
      two magnetic fields from actual line connections, and the arangement
      can either be made in unison or opposition of fields. We do not have
      this option with two wire delivery, because then the secondary will
      always act to produce a field in opposition by lenz law, and
      reversing the coil connections will not influence the neon discharge,
      whereas in 5 wire delivery this does act to reduce the currents in
      half the levels made with opposition. The reason opposition acts to
      increase the interphasing currents, is that the impedance of the
      interphasing circuit is reduced. Thus when intially mesuring
      reactances in the 5 wire delivery on DSR1, we can know that one
      polarity of coil arrangement will allow better current conduction
      then the other, and the greater consumption is the one producing
      magnetic opposition, but in two wire DSR1delivery there will be no
      such differences, and that it should have an overall impedance
      reduction by mutual inductance with DSR2, but it would naturally be
      supposed that the decreased impedance of DSR1 by this effect should
      be greater in the 5 wire case than the 2, since then we are reacting
      real voltage input magnetic fields, and not merely one with its
      reaction field. This then (initially thought, now found untrue)
      implies that a smaller C1 value can be used to increase the
      efficiency for the 2 wire case, than for what C1 value the 5 wire
      case uses, thus a further retuning can be tried for the 2 wire case.
      Thus to compare these actions first only the 2 wire case is noted

      1.71 (parametric stator)volts enables .33A on DSR1
      Changing meter selection to lower 4-400 ma range;
      1.79 stator volts enables 309 ma
      (this shows how the parametric stator voltage can change by the
      impedance added by meter amperage range)
      X(L) reactance consumption; 1.95 volts enables 82.4 ma = 23.66 Ohms
      X(C) reactance consumption: 2.13 volts enables 91.2 ma = 23.35 Ohms

      Now for the five wire delivery we have two reactive amperage
      consumptions to be noted, unison and opposition, where any supposed
      increased impedance cancellation on DSR1 can be noted, since now we
      are reacting "real magnetic fields together" instead of the reaction
      field with its source, as occurs in 2 wire input. We also note as
      small drop in input voltage as X(C) changes to 2.07 volts enabling
      87.6 ma = 23.63 ohms.
      (Note; this shows the wide margin of error made in momentarily noting
      fluctuations of meter readings, and that all these ohmic figures are
      close to resonant values, and apparently here the 2 wire system
      should not need retuned using the 14.14 uf C1 values also used for 5
      wire delivery.)

      Now the 5 wire delivery is compared.
      X(L) reactance consumption; 1.87 volts enables 90.1 ma = 20.55 ohms
      Now the votage meter is also added across that coil itself which
      becomes the V(int) meter to note DSR1 resonant voltage rise with
      respect to stator voltage source. Doing this shows some small changes
      where now that meter reads 1.81 volts enabling 87.5 ma = 20.68 ohms

      So actually what seems to be the case here is that the system is
      tuned for 2 wire delivery, and instead perhaps a correction can be
      made for the 5 wire case. Let us see the variance made by reversing
      the connections and also noting the interphasing reaction made with
      the imposed voltages and amperages by adding these meters . We would
      not ordinarily expect much of reaction on that side since we have
      not yet enabled the higher DSR1 amperage conductions that occur when
      it is made for resonance by addition of the C1 value. Amazingly
      however the reactance amperges in DSR1 itself do make a big
      difference in the interphasing currents, although predictably it does
      not change ithe actual interphasing voltage much.
      For DSR1 reactive current opposition: MIDPT volts 45.6 enables 1.65
      For DSR1 reactive current in unison: MIDPT volts 47.0 enables
      0.20 ma

      For DSR1 reactive current measurement itself in magnetic unison 1.886
      volts with hardly any difference in stator voltage at 1.889 volts,
      (formerly this difference was a reduction from 1.87 to 1.81 volts on V
      (int) meter) enables a smaller conduction of 55 ma or X(L,unison)=
      34.3 ohms.

      Now in each of these circumstances we can see that the coil acts with
      different impedances, thus we can give each X(L) value an acting
      inductance brought on by mutual inductance, and to also see how this
      deviates from the measured 10.8 mh value
      For Opposition X(L) = 20.68 ohms ~ to 6.86 mh
      For Unison X(L) = 34.3 ohms ~ to 11.37 mh, thus only an increase
      of .57 mh frm 10.8 mh LCR meter measurement, but for the opposition
      case more than 4 mh acting inductance has been removed. This shows
      the degree of mutual inductance that the L2 coil makes on L1, where
      then the method seems to indicate that it is easier to decrease the
      impedance than to increase it. (There are additional reactance
      considerations here also with the actual timings of each field,
      because we are comparing reactance currents with resonant in actual

      For the 2 wire delivery that acting X(L) at 23.66 would be an acting
      inductance of 7.84 mh ,which is a 3 mh reduction from isolated 10.8
      mh measurement.

      Thus we can note that the 2 wire method decreased the acting
      inductance by 3 mh, but the 5 wire method reduced this 4 mh, and also
      that each system then needs differing C1 values for best operation,
      and it is the 5 wire usage of 14.14 uf that needs to be changed to
      look for better results in that delivery.
      Thus a better lower C value to try will be (20.7/23.6)*14.14 uf =
      12.4 uf.

      Perhaps then this will match the 3.9-4.0 ma delivery that the 2 wire
      method gives.

      Lastly the 5 wire operation in magnetic cancellation gives readings
      of 1.885 stator volts enabling V(int)=8.15 volts enabling 326 ma
      conductiuon of DSR1. Midppoint voltage is reduced to 25 volts
      enabling 3.6 ma, with single ended neon discharge made from midpoint

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