My Mode 3 - In action

[min2oly]

@Patrick,
Just for clarity did you manually fire the SSR or the dump itself? I was suggesting you manually fire the trigger side of the SSR with a battery, basically taking the place of the MC trigger signal. How are you powering your MC anyway? I still feel that you may be able to get the same result as me from the setup you had going BUT the trigger signalling is critical here. Try by passing the diodes on the MC to eliminate any loss there and power the MC externally, not just from the computer USB. You can connect an external supply over on the power side of the board there are pins for that, you don't need the plug connector. There is a Vin pin and a ground that you can hook up. What I am really getting at here is those SSR's are sensitive to the input voltage. A lot of people think that if it is firing it's all good but you can have a weak firing of them just like turning a POT on a regular system or conversely what I am trying to make sure of is that it gets the full punch, kind of like what the CPD does for a BJT. I'm not saying that it is not getting the full on but I just want to methodically go over and make sure is all.

Now one other comment about what you said with the charge side not seeing that high potential. We were looking to find it, not capitalize on it.

As I said a few posts back:


I will say though that having a 400v potential hanging out ANYWHERE in the circuit is helpful. You know how you start to take advantage of it, when your working in both directions. DO you remember the video I showed you along time ago, the real cap dancing video? Do you remember what the primary side was doing? That is the direction this path lead me.

By the way guys I don't want to come off as a know it all because I am not. I am just trying to share some of what I have sorted out for myself with you guys.

https://files.secureserver.net/0sEJsTyOxjoENu where the draw on the primary varied from 1-ish amp to 1.5-ish amps, and the output to the battery was in 4-5 amp pulses?

Thanks again for sharing,
KR - Patrick

[BobZilla]

Hi Patrick,
Ok thanks for clarifying what you tried, sometimes gets confusing when we are just lobbing info beck and fourth. What I mean is it's not the same as having a real conversation is all.

I won't take a stance one way or the other about open sparks and if we loose or gain from them because I have felt exactly as you at times and at others it seemed practical. I would say though something to consider is Mr. Tesla used spark gaps on a lot of his stuff to get very fast switching with lots of power. He even used magnets to quench the spark and control it with even more precision. More closer to home I can say for sure that not too long ago I was posting about my all mechanical conversion of my smaller machine, this one arc's on all of the relays but charged very well despite of it. Exactly as you said a few posts back there is something to be said for mechanical switching, that is what I was pursuing with those mods. If you haven't gone and looked in awhile go pop by my thread in the beginners section and check out that work.

No not that video.... I'm going to post a link below but let me tee up by saying that this originally was a private video and it was made years ago when I started really improving the dancing method. I mention this so that people watching don't think I just shot it, this is old news for me. I think you have seen this already Patrick but maybe now that you are starting to play with these methods it's worth another look since you have some context. Pair what this shows in the final example with my comment about the video and I think you will see why I said what I said about it.

https://1drv.ms/v/s!AmzmftzD-V0mhmQCBXFnl2Q6YNX3

[min2oly]

Hi Patrick,
Ok thanks for clarifying what you tried, sometimes gets confusing when we are just lobbing info beck and fourth. What I mean is it's not the same as having a real conversation is all.

I won't take a stance one way or the other about open sparks and if we loose or gain from them because I have felt exactly as you at times and at others it seemed practical. I would say though something to consider is Mr. Tesla used spark gaps on a lot of his stuff to get very fast switching with lots of power. He even used magnets to quench the spark and control it with even more precision. More closer to home I can say for sure that not too long ago I was posting about my all mechanical conversion of my smaller machine, this one arc's on all of the relays but charged very well despite of it. Exactly as you said a few posts back there is something to be said for mechanical switching, that is what I was pursuing with those mods. If you haven't gone and looked in awhile go pop by my thread in the beginners section and check out that work.

No not that video.... I'm going to post a link below but let me tee up by saying that this originally was a private video and it was made years ago when I started really improving the dancing method. I mention this so that people watching don't think I just shot it, this is old news for me. I think you have seen this already Patrick but maybe now that you are starting to play with these methods it's worth another look since you have some context. Pair what this shows in the final example with my comment about the video and I think you will see why I said what I said about it.

https://1drv.ms/v/s!AmzmftzD-V0mhmQCBXFnl2Q6YNX3

[BobZilla]

Hi Bob,
I remember that one, back in May? of 2014… Gen mode – so don’t you get that same reaction on the primary without the “dancing” dump – that is with a regular cap dump? My modded Neg to Neg has always done that with or without the cap dump. It is more dramatic with the cap dump however because you must let the charging side get higher than the primary side. I think I made a similar comment way back when. I heard JB demonstrated this at one of the conferences you and I are the only ones I know who have reported being able to replicate it. I was always surprised it didn't get more attention considering.

Yeah, I’m not going to keep harping on about the mechanical switching, people are either interested or they aren’t or maybe they are already doing it and just not reporting – I see you get it already though.

I will say that using the Arduino to control timing will sincerely cut down the learning curve in terms of figuring out what components to use if you want a standalone integrated cap dump, that is, a cap dump driven by the rise in voltage rather than time. I was able to narrow down exactly what cap to use on my CPD ultimate cap dump to get the effects I wanted for one of my setups. I do like the simplicity of the Arduino though. Have you ever tried to drive the dumps with a voltage sensor?

Bob - with your intuition and resourcefulness I would highly recommend picking up even a cheap $100 O-scope. It's not the end all answer to anything but it sure helps with fine tuning at this level.

Still waiting on my FET’s…
KR - Patrick

Yes we do see this somewhat with any neg-neg setup, I even said that in the video but the interplay that happens with the "dancing" is different. More to the point is that the reason I brought out this old video and made mention of it was because of the comments on the 400v not going to the charge etc,, when you use the neg-neg and teh caps at both ends you are litterally harvesting dipoles at both sides and in both ways which is different from just dumping at 40v and watching for a big tickle on the meter. The real dancing as I later refined it is not like the code you tried out from earlier in the post. I mean yes it is based on that but that was just the simple loop , like the first example in that video, to really get it happening you add ALOT more events as in the last part of that video. I took it farther than that later on with a little less emphasis on a "big pop" and little pops, and made it more of a constant grind above charge potential, meaning the big pop didn't need to be as big as I originally was doing it. All of this is just the basis of what I was playing with and not the final version. In your video you referred to "stair stepping down" at one point, yes that is what you want but with many more rapid steps. See back then I thought the speed was limited by the devices and it is but they can go much faster than I thought originally. I know your hung up at the moment on the 400v thing but that was not the best thing to come out of those experiments. I think we are getting the pre spike regardless of the cap amplitude but it shows up more dramatically once we get around 40v. There sees to be an amplifying effect which correlates to the current that will flow, not flowing at the time but the pressure between potentials amplifies the effect. It is not so much how much capacity you use but more of the potential you are switching.

[min2oly]

Yes we do see this somewhat with any neg-neg setup, I even said that in the video but the interplay that happens with the "dancing" is different. More to the point is that the reason I brought out this old video and made mention of it was because of the comments on the 400v not going to the charge etc,, when you use the neg-neg and teh caps at both ends you are litterally harvesting dipoles at both sides and in both ways which is different from just dumping at 40v and watching for a big tickle on the meter. The real dancing as I later refined it is not like the code you tried out from earlier in the post. I mean yes it is based on that but that was just the simple loop , like the first example in that video, to really get it happening you add ALOT more events as in the last part of that video. I took it farther than that later on with a little less emphasis on a "big pop" and little pops, and made it more of a constant grind above charge potential, meaning the big pop didn't need to be as big as I originally was doing it. All of this is just the basis of what I was playing with and not the final version. In your video you referred to "stair stepping down" at one point, yes that is what you want but with many more rapid steps. See back then I thought the speed was limited by the devices and it is but they can go much faster than I thought originally. I know your hung up at the moment on the 400v thing but that was not the best thing to come out of those experiments. I think we are getting the pre spike regardless of the cap amplitude but it shows up more dramatically once we get around 40v. There sees to be an amplifying effect which correlates to the current that will flow, not flowing at the time but the pressure between potentials amplifies the effect. It is not so much how much capacity you use but more of the potential you are switching.

Hi Bob,
I must not be stating things very clearly - I think we agree on pretty much everything you are saying. I'm not hung up on anything except maybe the pre-spike at the moment which I'm pretty sure you are creating in your experiments as well.

My main interest at this point is isolating the events to get a better understanding of cause and effect. This is why I reached out to this older thread of yours. I think I only mentioned the big spike once in an earlier post in order to reference what you were talking about. So your focus with the dancing/grinding is not the pre-spike but more so of creating the pressure, another block wall so the energy can flow both ways? Very cool!

"Yes we do see this somewhat with any neg-neg setup" you are saying what is created with the "dancing" is different, I agree. However, just as you wanted me to clarify how I was triggering the SSR manually....

I'm asking to clarify if you see the primary effect with a normal cap dump at the same voltages you are seeing them with the "dancing" dump? I think in all the years, you are one of the only experimenters to show your runs in terms of charging curves etc. This is another reason people should believe you when you say you see what you see.

KR - Patrick

[BobZilla]

Hi Patrick ,
So I think we mostly get what each other says, when I repeat things or say them a little different I also kind of know that I am speaking to a larger audience whether they ever come out of the shadows or not. I don't want to beat this thing into the ground but let me just do a little round up on your last comments.

This part in particular:
"My main interest at this point is isolating the events to get a better understanding of cause and effect. This is why I reached out to this older thread of yours. I think I only mentioned the big spike once in an earlier post in order to reference what you were talking about. So your focus with the dancing/grinding is not the pre-spike but more so of creating the pressure, another block wall so the energy can flow both ways? Very cool!"

Lets reflect a minute on how we arrived at the 400v thing. The dancing/grinding thing IS about the pre-spike, the whole thing was based on the pre-spike and finding it. I hate to keep saying go look at this or read that but the chronological order of things here is telling. The first time I ever spoke of the cap dancing I mentioned the order of the spike and emphasized it with Mr. Tesla's power plant story and how I was trying to recreate those conditions to find the pre-current spike. The in-rush of radiant at the switch throw, you see the whole time it was about the pre-spike. Now going back to those first few posts from back then I came back and said look guys here is some evidence of it working when I talked about the 400v thing the first time, the only thing was that I had figured out to raise the voltage up to 40'ish to really see it happening but both the dancing and just popping 40v both are about the rush of energy seen BEFORE current flows and never about the other more common field collapsing post current spike. You have to look at what the purpose of the cap dancing was, he whole thing was as I said "harvesting as many dipoles as possible", do you see what the intent of the whole thing was, it has nothing to do with the current from the cap dump. I have said it a few different ways and Patrick you probably fully understand what I have said already but just to say again, if we can believe that that spike is real and not some BS in the meter or something it shows the pre-current spike because we are not messing with a coil and a huge magnetic field collapse. It is the opposite of that really.

I will put together a video showing a few different iterations of the dumping with neg-neg, without, with single pulses, with dancing pulses etc.. and hopefully help clarify what you want to know about teh conditions that produce the 400v thing. I will say that I have seen it work way below 40v but not as consistently. We will see that in the video to come.

Thanks for the interest Patrick and the kind words. Just know that I don't mean to sound pushy or snarky, we are all just experimenters here trying to find some answers. Honestly I'm excited to see you start investigating a little of what I have talked about. You will find new avenues that I may not have found as I know you are a very clever and resourceful experimenter yourself. You are a true experimenter in my book, you have brought innovations to the table and enlightened many through your work. Many more out there just do as their told and leave it at that. Worst yet is when they don't even understand the context in which something was given or attribute things to the wrong causes. I see a lot of misunderstandings by people but it's just not worth trying to explain anything, you will get "no,,the book said this" or whatever. If you have 50 people all telling each other the same things and validating themselves over and over with the same material you do not have any real experimentation at all. DO you know how many time Mr. Bedini must have been told you can't do that, or it doesn't work that way, yea I have had people say the same things to me even though it is right in front of them.

[min2oly]

I was just re-watching your video and noticed on the spikes we keep talking about... your meter does not reflect any spikes at all, it is the radio shack "Meter View" software that is showing the spikes and only the graph, not the numbers in the upper left hand corner. I have windows 10 and it will not communicate with my radio shack meter at all. USB to com port error.

Am I wrong, did I miss the meter showing it somewhere? In any event, neither my meter or my scope show it. I keep playing around with my 1RFP260N's to no avail. I do have the same diodes as you do so I should be good to go when FET's arrive.

[min2oly]

Hi Patrick ,
So I think we mostly get what each other says, when I repeat things or say them a little different I also kind of know that I am speaking to a larger audience whether they ever come out of the shadows or not. I don't want to beat this thing into the ground but let me just do a little round up on your last comments.

This part in particular:
"My main interest at this point is isolating the events to get a better understanding of cause and effect. This is why I reached out to this older thread of yours. I think I only mentioned the big spike once in an earlier post in order to reference what you were talking about. So your focus with the dancing/grinding is not the pre-spike but more so of creating the pressure, another block wall so the energy can flow both ways? Very cool!"

Lets reflect a minute on how we arrived at the 400v thing. The dancing/grinding thing IS about the pre-spike, the whole thing was based on the pre-spike and finding it. I hate to keep saying go look at this or read that but the chronological order of things here is telling. The first time I ever spoke of the cap dancing I mentioned the order of the spike and emphasized it with Mr. Tesla's power plant story and how I was trying to recreate those conditions to find the pre-current spike. The in-rush of radiant at the switch throw, you see the whole time it was about the pre-spike. Now going back to those first few posts from back then I came back and said look guys here is some evidence of it working when I talked about the 400v thing the first time, the only thing was that I had figured out to raise the voltage up to 40'ish to really see it happening but both the dancing and just popping 40v both are about the rush of energy seen BEFORE current flows and never about the other more common field collapsing post current spike. You have to look at what the purpose of the cap dancing was, he whole thing was as I said "harvesting as many dipoles as possible", do you see what the intent of the whole thing was, it has nothing to do with the current from the cap dump. I have said it a few different ways and Patrick you probably fully understand what I have said already but just to say again, if we can believe that that spike is real and not some BS in the meter or something it shows the pre-current spike because we are not messing with a coil and a huge magnetic field collapse. It is the opposite of that really.

I will put together a video showing a few different iterations of the dumping with neg-neg, without, with single pulses, with dancing pulses etc.. and hopefully help clarify what you want to know about teh conditions that produce the 400v thing. I will say that I have seen it work way below 40v but not as consistently. We will see that in the video to come.

Thanks for the interest Patrick and the kind words. Just know that I don't mean to sound pushy or snarky, we are all just experimenters here trying to find some answers. Honestly I'm excited to see you start investigating a little of what I have talked about. You will find new avenues that I may not have found as I know you are a very clever and resourceful experimenter yourself. You are a true experimenter in my book, you have brought innovations to the table and enlightened many through your work. Many more out there just do as their told and leave it at that. Worst yet is when they don't even understand the context in which something was given or attribute things to the wrong causes. I see a lot of misunderstandings by people but it's just not worth trying to explain anything, you will get "no,,the book said this" or whatever. If you have 50 people all telling each other the same things and validating themselves over and over with the same material you do not have any real experimentation at all. DO you know how many time Mr. Bedini must have been told you can't do that, or it doesn't work that way, yea I have had people say the same things to me even though it is right in front of them.

Also, just to restate. I know the spikes are there. I do see them when I touch the cable to the battery by hand, mechanically if you will...
Furthermore - it does not matter if I ever see them on my scope, what you see in the primary and charge battery is what counts.

[BobZilla]

Here is a new video that is only about the 400v thing your interested in. No need for a long description here because I explain what I am doing in the video.

https://1drv.ms/v/s!AmzmftzD-V0miGD7Q9Dm7BLfnFFR

[min2oly]

Here is a new video that is only about the 400v thing your interested in. No need for a long description here because I explain what I am doing in the video.

https://1drv.ms/v/s!AmzmftzD-V0miGD7Q9Dm7BLfnFFR

Hi Bob,
I don't see the "cap neg to mosfet source diode" in this setup, is it not necessary then? Is that an addition cap bank you have on the output side, parallel to the battery?
Thanks - Patrick

Nevermind - your diode looked like the FET and your SSR's looked like a cap bank - haha on me :-)

[min2oly]

Hi Bob,
I don't see the "cap neg to mosfet source diode" in this setup, is it not necessary then? Is that an addition cap bank you have on the output side, parallel to the battery?
Thanks - Patrick

Nevermind - your diode looked like the FET and your SSR's looked like a cap bank - haha on me :-)

I'm using the 1n5408 for the diode, is that still ok? Which one are you using in the vid?

[BobZilla]

Diode shouldn't matter too much really. That whole cap dump board was built just to plug into any machine so it is a self contained unit, meaning it has a MC, caps, diode and now SSR's as the switch are all on one board ready to plug onto whatever, mechanical or a SS. I put a beefy diode on it because originally I had three 33k caps on it which was a lot to be dumping, later on I changed those out for what you see now with teh 1k, 15k, 33k arrangement. That's why it still has that 3 prong diode, just left over from a larger capacitance setup.


*EDIT*
I went and looked at my account on Mouser and looked t my past orders. I am pretty sure that that exact diode is this:

http://www.mouser.com/Search/Product...1-STTH100W06CW

I also used a lot of these on builds, good diodes:

http://www.mouser.com/Search/Product...ualkey583-SF84

As I said though, I really don't think teh diode makes a difference for what your trying to see, as long as it is a strong enough diode for the circuit. I'm just listing these so that you know precisely what parts I use.

The 5408's also work fine, they were just rated for less current is all.

[min2oly]

This is how I'm doing it below, although I have put the meter and the scope all over the place to check out various things, but this is how you have it when using a FET right?



Now one other thing comes to mind. Will it do this even if you get rid of the analog meters? I can't see why it wouldn't, if anything those analog meters are dampening the effect... but just checking.

[min2oly]

Ok - I took another shot at it and am able to get the meter to behave like yours:

I'm still pursuing the dancing dipoles and FETs should get here by this weekend. I like what it's doing on the charge and primary. I've also eliminated the diode alltogether as well as used some High Voltage Diodes from experimenting with Aaron's plasma spark. Nothing yet...
KR - Patrick

[BobZilla]

Hi Patrick,
Yes your diagram look right to me. If you go to high on capacity you may want to put more FET's in parallel to handle more current but teh flip side of that is a single device switches more cleanly by itself.

So the video looks good man. Your meter is doing it too, yes you don't have the software hooked up but anyone can see it's the same thing as mine. So no spike to be found on the O-scope then, well that disappoints me a little but we have to go with the facts and not our hopes right. The only thing I would say is that despite what meters may show I saw some serious gains with the dancing method and nothing would convince me that there is nothing special going on. I know your not saying that but I'm just stating it for everyone.

I have been trying to understand and theorize about why that stupid meter does what it does. It is sensing something there and we know how to make it happen or to make it not happen. I am thinking that perhaps internally when the meter first senses voltage it chooses an internal resistor to sample with, you know it may use serveral resistors depending on the voltage it senses. So it is running along on teh resistor it has chosen to use for that scale of voltage but perhaps we are seeing an inrush of voltage (maybe it's not 400 volts but something very quickly) and it reacts to the sudden change by flipping into a different scale and sampling resistor, but then that rush is gone again so it flips back to the original sample. Maybe this won't make sense but I'm just saying that maybe because the meter has "auto" sensing it starts at one scale and then flips over to the setup it would have used if we were on higher voltage to start. Anyway it's a real stretch but I can't ignore that that meter is reacting to something that we can control at will.