Bedini RPX Sideband Generator

* NEW * BEDINI RPX BOOK & DVD SET: BEDINI RPX


ONLY 150 118 99 71 63 SEATS AVAILABLE! - 2019 ENERGY CONFERENCE

Monero XMR

Page 15 of 15 FirstFirst ... 5131415
Results 141 to 145 of 145

Thread: "Enhanced Generator" from JPKBook

  1. #141
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Sussex and Cornwall, England
    Posts
    98

    Observations and Thoughts

    Hi all,

    While I haven't yet found out why the cap dump circuit isn't discharging to the batteries, I seem to have stopped the FET from being damaged (not sure how or why) and have instead been able to measure the voltage rising on the 45,000uF capture capacitor and how quickly that occurs. As previously indicated the hope is that the capture capacitor and circuit might be able to 'process' the HV pulses/ZPE faster than a battery, as there are no heavy chemical ions to shift, and therefore respond better to an increase in the HV frequency. So far observations suggest that the issue is more complicated in that there are other factors that can make a significant contribution to the energy transferred to the caps/batteries. For completeness I have included an updated and simplified schematic for the whole generator including the cap dump circuit. The battery swapper incorporates a heavy duty relay which switches the battery stack being used to power the inverter and the main circuit every two minutes (adjustable) and at the same time directs the output from the cap dump circuit to the other battery stack.

    So what I have noticed so far is that the choice of MOSFET makes a big difference to the battery charging. For most of the work I have used an IRF840 but out of curiosity I switched to the IRFP260 (see spec comparison pic). With the former FET, when the HV (at 150Hz) is connected to a single battery in common ground mode, the voltage would rise from 12.2 to 15.8 in about 10 seconds. However, when the same HV is directed to the three battery 36V stack then the voltage would rise from 36.8 to 37.1V over 10s. When I switched to the IRFP260, charging the single battery was similar but with a higher circuit current and with the three batteries the voltage went from 36.9-38.1V over 10s. In other words charging a set of three batteries works much better with the 260 FET. I surmise that this is in part due to the HV pulse width being wider so there's more energy 'under the curve' (compare pulse pics) even though the peak pulse voltage is lower (both measured with 20:1 voltage divider). I am also aware that the best energy transfer occurs when the coil impedance matches that of the batteries being charged but apart from changing the coil configuration I don't know what can be done to better match them. My seven coils in parallel come to 0.5 Ohms which is probably quite close to the batteries but FET's characteristics are also relevant it seems. RS suggested that the 'flyback' diode built into the FETs will try to dampen HV pulses and so using BJTs should give better results.

    These observations and the measurements I have done to date raise various questions about the optimum conditions for inducing ZPE into our circuits. From what I have read one of the prime theories for ZPE influx is based on John Wheeler's theory of vacuum polarisation. I have shown this in the attached drawing and where getting ZPE to cohere and flow into a circuit is a direct result of a high voltage gradient of the sort that Bedini type devices produce. It is common to have a high dV/dt with little or no current and while a few forum members have had a go at measuring the current component of the HV pulses flowing into a battery, it seems from my own and others' observations that the higher the circuit current the better the battery charging which suggests that either the charging involves 'hot' components as well as ZPE or that an HV spike with little current component is less of an inducement for ZPE to enter the circuit than one with a bit more electron flow.

    Measurements I made a month or so back showed that as I increased the HV frequency with the signal generator, the overall circuit current reduced and the rate of battery charging did not get better and better but actually went down after an optimum value. While I expect the small digital voltmeters have a harder time keeping up I can't assume they are completely wrong and the lower current may well explain why the charging levels fall with increasing frequency. On the face of it, delivering twice as many pulses to the battery should produce twice the rate of charging and the fact that it doesn't may be related to the reduced circuit current at the higher frequencies, quite possibly due to the increasing coil impedance that rises with frequency, or some other factor. We must remember that when a coil is energised there is the opposite of the HV pulse occurring at the front end of the energising process and perhaps this starts to dominate at higher frequencies.

    As ever some useful questions arise out of play to date and which any contributions would be welcomed.

    1. Which BJTs have been seen to give the best results as coil drivers instead of using FETs?

    2. Does the influx of ZPE to a circuit depend just on the voltage gradient of the HV pulses or is the current component of the HV a significant factor?

    3. What is the largest net power output or COP that anyone has achieved so far with either rotary or solid state induction generators?

    Onwards - as ever.

    Jules
    Attached Images Attached Images

  2. #142
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Sussex and Cornwall, England
    Posts
    98

    Inductive Reactance

    The correct term for the increasing impedance of an inductor (coil) with increasing frequency is Reactance. This is why just ramping up the frequency gives diminishing returns. To some extend one can compensate by using a higher duty cycle with the square wave generator.

    When I have the cap dump circuit operational and found the optimum coil driver BJT or FET, I will start to do tests of rate of capacitor charging and direct battery charging against frequency and consequently available net output power. All results will be posted here in due course.

    Jules


    Reactance.jpeg

  3. #143
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Sussex and Cornwall, England
    Posts
    98

    Coil Driver Comparisons

    Hi all,

    I have been experimenting with different coil drivers to obtain the best HV spikes and battery charging and partly inspired by the suggestion that using FETs can severely limit the spikes due to the 'flyback diode' incorporated in many of them between the Drain and Source.

    I did a comparison of 4 drivers, two FETs and two BJTs but my tests were interrupted by some component failures so I will have to complete them again when all is back up running smoothly but I thought it might encourage some useful discussion to show what I found so far and that might come up with some more suggestions.

    I have presented the data I have so far in the table below and invite feedback via some questions and comments.

    1. There seems to be a distinct advantage to using a BJT over a FET with regard to the HV spike output however, those rotor systems using a Hall sensor will need to add some current to its output as, while they can drive a FET, they have little power to drive the base of a BJT. I am assuming that the 'flyback diode' in many FETs serves to short the HV spike to ground when the Drain goes positive however, the from the spec sheets, the diode would seem to be the wrong way round so I am unclear how this clipping occurs.

    2. The circuit current using the MJE13009 was surprisingly small and yet overall it performed the best in battery charging. As I understand it this was in part due to the much higher voltage, and hence inducement of ZPE into the circuit, but I can imagine that a higher current would support the battery charging even better. The question is how to increase the current when it is largely determined by the combined coil resistance, in my case 0.5 Ohms, assuming that the Base is fully turned on. As mentioned previously I have noted that as the drive signal increases in frequency the overall circuit current drops and have suggested that this might be due to increasing inductive reactance of the coil. However, it has been pointed out that such reactance is only relevant to full since wave ac and not pulsed DC despite the latter having sharp rise and fall gradients that would surely invoke an inductance based impedance.

    3. The HV pulse waveforms are markedly different between the FETs and the BJTs. Is this indicative of coil behaviour that is significant in any way?

    4. Any suggestions of other BJT or configurations that have resulted in good battery charging or COP>1?

    I will repeat these tests when my system is back running fully again but that is going to be some weeks now.

    Regards,

    Jules

    Coil Driver Comparisons.jpeg

  4. #144
    Quote Originally Posted by JulesP View Post
    I am assuming that the 'flyback diode' in many FETs serves to short the HV spike to ground when the Drain goes positive however, the from the spec sheets, the diode would seem to be the wrong way round so I am unclear how this clipping occurs
    That spike acts like high pressure area and kind of travels to all places provided there Is conductive path. I tried charging high voltage cap with some small SG oscillator and tried putting such protection diode over CE on BJT , and basically without diode, cap charged over 300 volts, with diode about 220 volts.

  5. #145
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Sussex and Cornwall, England
    Posts
    98
    Quote Originally Posted by TruthInZero View Post
    That spike acts like high pressure area and kind of travels to all places provided there Is conductive path. I tried charging high voltage cap with some small SG oscillator and tried putting such protection diode over CE on BJT , and basically without diode, cap charged over 300 volts, with diode about 220 volts.
    Yes that seems to concur with my findings but, as I have shown in the diagram, there is a good path for the HV to take and the position of the 'flyback diode' does not seem to interfere with that as, when the Drain/Collector goes +, the diode is in reverse bias. On that basis it shouldn't make any difference?

    Julian

    Flyback Diode.jpeg

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •