I want to create a system that will drive a Tesla Transformer Secondary at a resonance frequency.
As Tesla Transformer secondary coil resonates the self-frequency of the Secondary floats around.

So there is no way a generator that is set up to output a specific frequency can oscillate a Tesla Transformer Secondary.
Also the Secondary of the transformer oscillates many many times faster than the primary has to be excited.
Hundred or a thousand times faster.

The primary has to be excited by a sharp Dirac Function - like impulse. Not by a harmonic oscillation.
The primary is like a clapper that rings the bell.

So the system has to know when to strike the bell with the clapper to create constructive interference of vibrations in the bell, not distructive interference.

So we need PLL or a Phase Lock Loop system. I want a digital system because analog systems are made to hit the bell with a clapper every time the bell oscillates. This is not what we want here.

Modern industry uses FPGA or Field Gate Programmable Array to solve this problem. The FPGA should work at the frequencies of several hundred megaHertz because we are trying to analize the oscillation of the Tesla Transformer Secondary to calculate the precise timing of the next pulse on the Tesla Transformer's Primary.

We need an process frequency of FPGA that is higher than that of the Tesla Transformer's resonance because we need to analize the damped harmonic oscillation of the Tesla Secondary at a higher resolution than the Tesla Coil oscillates.

I developed an algorith and an approximate architecture of this device with my partner, however we don't have skills to work with FPGA and we don't know much about digital filters that are programmed into FPGA to sift out the noise.

Should we use synchrounious or asynchronious mode of operation when it comes to analizing the damped oscillation of Tesla Secondary?

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B2TsMZPT3tGAN0tBOU5ZRFdIX2c/view?usp=sharing
The most up to date flowchart. (I am working on it.)

This device may have a number of commercial applications and we are looking for people that may work with us on this project.

Tarakan, have you looked at the Cypress PSoC device?

I have found this platform to be so flexible and powerful--so far nothing I can think of is beyond it's capability.

I started with this development kit to get a good feel of its capability:
http://www.cypress.com/?rID=51577&source=shop

Have a look and see if it will do what you need.  Possible the frequency range is a little low with a 24 Mhz system clock.  Really depends on how much resolution you need.

Thank you.
Maybe I will stick to somthing like Cypress, maybe to Mojo. Maybe some more expensive demoboard /evaluation board.
There are numbers of products that I considered. Mostly FPGA- related since it is tempting to program everything into FPGA, including the optional DEMUX that will tap the "clappers".

Maybe different clappers can be tested even, by making a MOSFET, a sperk gap and a tyratron clapper run simultaniously.

I cannot handle the task myself beginning to the end. It will take me more than a lifetime.

What is the point of developing a research platform if noone will use it for research?
I am looking for partners in crime.

There are many potential uses to this device such as:

• metal detectors
• mine detectors
• mine detanators - to disarm planted mines
• geological survey
• RFID
• Health diagnostic related
• power transmision
• many many more

I have some things figured out, but they are theoretical. I can also wind a Tesla Transformer and help with some other parts, but crafting the whole device beginning to the end is not something I can do.

Plus it is a research platform more so than a complete toy that you build and set on your shelf.
This platfrom may itself be sold as a platform that many researchers will fit for their use.

I feel like many mysteries of Tesla may be solved this way.

Quote

What is the point of developing a research platform if noone will use it for research?
I am looking for partners in crime.

tarakan,

that´s a great idea!
i went down the same path as you when i built the PGen pulse generator application. years ago there were people in the OU community telling that they would like to get that kind of development tool.
i built it, i sell it - and their interest  is gone ...

i have no idea why, but it´s difficult to set up a cooperation thru a forum like this.

however there was one contact to my business partner Edward Mitchell from True Green Solutions that lasts over the years.

why?
because both of us have the same understanding about "digging into the rabbit hole" and focussing on a common subject for a long period of time.

your approach sounds interesting to me and i really would like to jump in.
as far as i can see it will take some time to get it running and there is no chance for short term revenue.

my idea:
start with a development kit of your choice to get in touch with that tech.
once you have created some prototype modules implementing milestone ideas of your theory you have made a step from theory to implementation. and you´ll have a great knowledge buildup according to FPGA implementation.
then you can decide to proceed on yourself or look for a partner.

IMO your endeavour needs a trustful partner for cooperation and workload sharing.

Trust seems to be the key for successful cooperation. As soon as some implementation needs  special knowledge and others can´t replicate on their own to make money they prefer to look for a trivial solution to create it themselves.

grief and lack of trust.
where companies would make contracts to get commitment in these forums cooperation quickly changes to competition ...

there are some subjects you´ll have to take special care for:

- high speed signal amplification
- signal distortion and shielding from high voltage interference

@Tarakan

I am interested in working on this project, but finding time seems to be difficult.
The more directions or pointers you keep adding, probably it will increase the curiosity.

Devoting consistent time is the problem for people like me. I get continuous free time for some time and none for most of the time. :)

Some one some day might do some work, so create a forum or work bench like others here and keep posting your ideas and what you want to accomplish

I wish that I could cook someone food and wash someone's dishes to give them time to work on their share of the project.

I cannot do much besides coding in C, I don't have time, energy money and interest to learn all the technology that is required
because this is too detached from my immediate needs and survival.

Maybe we need our own "Star Trek Convention".

I don't want to start a business around this idea. I would rather keep it open-source.

When it comes to shielding from high voltage, I am planning to use a neon bulb. I read about such high voltage probes for the oscilloscopes and I found it a handy method to isolate measuring equipment from high voltage.

So do I just abandon this idea as something that is still "ahead of it's time" or what shall I do?

start to build an early prototype for proof of concept.

Quote from Gunther Rattay on January 10th, 2015, 02:56 PM

start to build an early prototype for proof of concept.

the problem is that i cannot work with FPGA
it is too far away from my skill set

but building something that works on low frequency using arduino - maybe
if i wind a Tesla transformer on a plastic silo tower - the self frequency of that transformer will be low enough for arduino to handle

The VIC resonator http://open-source-energy.org/?topic=1097.0
is technically an Arduino - downgraded version of my idea. Except that I had my idea for almost 4 years.
I just never bothered to draw a flowchart before.

But I want to see some effects with the Tesla Transformer and a downgraded version of the circuit may not serve as a proof of concept but instead demonstrate disappointing, demotivating results. This concept has to either be entirely implemented or not touched at all.

Was some mechanical bird that flapped it's wings, jerked around and fell apart from unbalanced forces a helpful proof of concept before something like Wright Brothers' airplane was built?

Probably not.
It just created this public opinion that "heavier than air" flying machines with wings are impossible and that all of this is child's play.

I think a lot about the enthusiasts, such as Wright Brothers doing the work while people like Samuel Pierpont Langley geting all the resources.

I know that I am suppose to be born of rich parents, be healthy to take part in the academic war of all against all, kneel before the existing authorities, earn credentials and than conduct research. Too many steps for a lifetime.

This is why I have great hopes for counter-academic science.

A number of commercial products can be made with the concept.
A platform has to be handy so different mathematicians and programmers could try to do different things with it.

Hi. I'm new here but i do have a little experience with Tesla Coils,
I've never come across a TC that is excited by a 'Dirac Function - like impulse'
The closest I've seen is driving the base of the resonator directly with a 'flyback' type pulse, not very efficient.

Ignoring for the moment the timing considerations,
what kind of impulse generator do you have in mind?

Quote from Tarakan on January 11th, 2015, 01:04 PM

The VIC resonator http://open-source-energy.org/?topic=1097.0
is technically an Arduino - downgraded version of my idea. Except that I had my idea for almost 4 years.
I just never bothered to draw a flowchart before.

The VIC resonator is really maxing out the capability of the Arduino.  There is some distortion in frequency consistancy which is caused by all the other functions like LCD code and such.  Their is another solution to network multiple Arduinos together to distribute load, but frequency is still probably too limited for the needs of a Tesla coil.  An arduino coupled with a 4046 PLL and a divide by N circuit would probably be the simplest way to create clean higher frequencies.

Quote from Sulaiman on January 11th, 2015, 03:19 PM

Hi. I'm new here but i do have a little experience with Tesla Coils,
I've never come across a TC that is excited by a 'Dirac Function - like impulse'
The closest I've seen is driving the base of the resonator directly with a 'flyback' type pulse, not very efficient.

Ignoring for the moment the timing considerations,
what kind of impulse generator do you have in mind?

I am not sure what impulse. Square will give you many harmonicas. Dirac seems to be right. I am not the math genius either.
I think in blocks, like that flowchart I drew.

If I want to zoom in on one block of the flowchart, I can elaborate on it by drawing a flowchart of that block.
But I can't do it unless I know what we are working with here.

So Arduino may do the approximation of this idea if and only if it is programmed in Assembly.
That defeats the purpose of Arduino as a simple hobbyist's instrument.

FPGA sounds intriguing. I read a book on Verilog, but I don't have tools and time to do anything else.
All I can do is preach the idea of this system.

Print out my flowcharts and glue them to light posts across the world hoping that the seed will land on fertile soil. Or WHAT?

============

There is the problem with the word "COUPLING". I would rather use a board that is pre-made with a single FPGA than couple a whole bunch of ICs because this is where problems will happen, especially at MHz frequencies where bread boards are no longer useful.

For a hobbyist it is easier to experiment with code than to mess with soldering high frequency ICs. So FPGA is the solution.

@Tarakan,

It will be nice if you could start another thread and post all technical details, only technical discussions on that thread.
First list the things you want to achieve in FPGA.
one over all picture, i mean an ultimate goal.
Few mid level goals, of what you consider as steps or building blocks.
Importantly, the resources where one can get some ideas.

Initial thing you would wish to see, i mean a very basic first thing, to roll the things into momentum.

Any preference on Verilog or VHDL and the reason for it.

What kind of FPGA brand you want to stick to. Because some times it will be easier to stick to the FPGA's proprietary functions, than write the whole thing in verilog.

By the way, you aren't asking for a piece of cake, rather a cake factory. :)
It might cost a considerable amount of money and time, both are rare commodities in a daily workers life.

@All,

Whatever Tarakan is saying is well beyond the VIC circuit. It will be interesting to see.

Quote from firepinto on January 12th, 2015, 06:28 AM

The VIC resonator is really maxing out the capability of the Arduino.  There is some distortion in frequency consistancy which is caused by all the other functions like LCD code and such.  Their is another solution to network multiple Arduinos together to distribute load, but frequency is still probably too limited for the needs of a Tesla coil.  An arduino coupled with a 4046 PLL and a divide by N circuit would probably be the simplest way to create clean higher frequencies.

it´s easier to use a single multicore controller propeller than chain some arduinos for workload sharing. dealing with resonance means to use a trigger source to create resonant reaction. there is zero tolerance for distortions of any kind.
arduino could be programmed in assembler or all those interrupt events built into the libraries for user convenience could be switched off and counters could be used but for the upper MHz range there is noting left but FPGAs.
Matt Watt´s link to PSOC is a cool combination of FPGA driven by a microcontroller.

Quote from Tarakan on January 13th, 2015, 03:16 AM

...
There is the problem with the word "COUPLING". I would rather use a board that is pre-made with a single FPGA than couple a whole bunch of ICs because this is where problems will happen, especially at MHz frequencies where bread boards are no longer useful.

For a hobbyist it is easier to experiment with code than to mess with soldering high frequency ICs. So FPGA is the solution.

Agreed.

Quote

The closest I've seen is driving the base of the resonator directly with a 'flyback' type pulse, not very efficient.

That might not be true in the next few weeks. :D

Quote from nav on January 13th, 2015, 01:56 PM

That might not be true in the next few weeks. :D

Building something cool? Well. Document it, please. The "clapper" science is also very important to the subject matter.
As important as the  digital electronics side.

Anyways, the more popluar this idea gets the sooner we are going to see the Platform. Even if I die, extraterrestrials, FBI or CIA kidnap and kill me, the idea will still pick up interest :)

For that I will make some educationa videos on how this thing should be built.

Quote from Tarakan on January 14th, 2015, 04:07 AM

Building something cool? Well. Document it, please. The "clapper" science is also very important to the subject matter.
As important as the  digital electronics side.

Just posted an explanation on my bench.

Quote from Gunther Rattay on January 13th, 2015, 01:47 PM

it´s easier to use a single multicore controller propeller than chain some arduinos for workload sharing. dealing with resonance means to use a trigger source to create resonant reaction. there is zero tolerance for distortions of any kind.
arduino could be programmed in assembler or all those interrupt events built into the libraries for user convenience could be switched off and counters could be used but for the upper MHz range there is noting left but FPGAs.
Matt Watt´s link to PSOC is a cool combination of FPGA driven by a microcontroller.

I don't understand what people are trying to achieve here?
Are people saying that an inductor once the square wave dc pulsed is at V- will try to pulse at the same frequency at which it is being driven?
Any inductor, no matter what it is has a self resonant frequency at which it will collapse its voltage into a load and receive it back if there is a capacitor involved. It is our own narrow mindedness in the past that we never bothered to tune an inductor into an impedance matched LC network, that caused us to use ridiculous amounts of power and ACTUALLY FIGHT AGAINST self resonance.
What Stan is telling us is that every inductor we use tries to self resonate and it is ourselves that are stopping the process by placing none resonant, impedance mismatched devices on our inductors. Here is a simple test anyone can do:
Build a bifilar inductor of 200 turns of 28 gauge wire. Pulse it with 12v dc in series so that one of the coil wires is in series with the power source and place a flyback diode of 1000v in parallel to the power supply to shunt flyback to ground. The other bifilar wire, place less than a quarter wave open ended transmission line which is a quarter wave of the inductor self resonant oscillations.
Drive it at 120hz 25% V+ duty cycle and place a scope on the less than a quarter wave transmission line.
The bifilar during the 75% V- part of the duty cycle will not try to offload voltage at 120hz into the transmission line, it will try to offload at resonance because that is the nature of the beast. Now any transmission line below a quarter wave will have reactance that is capacitive and you will build capacitance on it. When all the voltage is offloaded into the line and lets say there is 50v there, the bifilar will load 50v into to each of its windings, but on the next pulse will put 100v back into the open ended line, it begins to step charge at resonance. I got to 762v before it blew my flyback diode into next year. Now that's 762v on each coil which is 1500v total. Now, if you begin to reduce the 75% of V- to 50% duty cycle then you can watch that voltage come down on the meter because you are reducing the time in which it can step charge at resonance. The amps will go up as you begin to make an inductor do something it doesn't want to do - resonate at an alien frequency.
Let the inductor do what it wants to do, don't force it to resonate at alien frequencies. Simples. 

Quote from Gunther Rattay on January 13th, 2015, 01:47 PM

it´s easier to use a single multicore controller propeller than chain some arduinos for workload sharing.

Well, I already accomplished it with 2 arduinos, and it was rather easy.  Easier than buying new equipment, and learning a new programming layout?  Maybe easier if already invested in a different microcontroller.

Quote from nav on January 14th, 2015, 08:33 AM

I don't understand what people are trying to achieve here?
Are people saying that an inductor once the square wave dc pulsed is at V- will try to pulse at the same frequency at which it is being driven?
Any inductor, no matter what it is has a self resonant frequency at which it will collapse its voltage into a load and receive it back if there is a capacitor involved. It is our own narrow mindedness in the past that we never bothered to tune an inductor into an impedance matched LC network, that caused us to use ridiculous amounts of power and ACTUALLY FIGHT AGAINST self resonance.
What Stan is telling us is that every inductor we use tries to self resonate and it is ourselves that are stopping the process by placing none resonant, impedance mismatched devices on our inductors. Here is a simple test anyone can do:
Build a bifilar inductor of 200 turns of 28 gauge wire. Pulse it with 12v dc in series so that one of the coil wires is in series with the power source and place a flyback diode of 1000v in parallel to the power supply to shunt flyback to ground. The other bifilar wire, place less than a quarter wave open ended transmission line which is a quarter wave of the inductor self resonant oscillations.
Drive it at 120hz 25% V+ duty cycle and place a scope on the less than a quarter wave transmission line.
The bifilar during the 75% V- part of the duty cycle will not try to offload voltage at 120hz into the transmission line, it will try to offload at resonance because that is the nature of the beast. Now any transmission line below a quarter wave will have reactance that is capacitive and you will build capacitance on it. When all the voltage is offloaded into the line and lets say there is 50v there, the bifilar will load 50v into to each of its windings, but on the next pulse will put 100v back into the open ended line, it begins to step charge at resonance. I got to 762v before it blew my flyback diode into next year. Now that's 762v on each coil which is 1500v total. Now, if you begin to reduce the 75% of V- to 50% duty cycle then you can watch that voltage come down on the meter because you are reducing the time in which it can step charge at resonance. The amps will go up as you begin to make an inductor do something it doesn't want to do - resonate at an alien frequency.
Let the inductor do what it wants to do, don't force it to resonate at alien frequencies. Simples.

Would this be what you had in mind Nav?



If so, would a concetric cable suffice for a transmission line?
How would one estimate the length thereof, I mean, how would you find out what the bifilar coil self resonant frequency is?

This seems like a very basic most circuit for getting to know the workings of bifilar coils, pulsing frequencies, duty cycles, etc etc, so I would be most happy to have a go at something like this.

I'd go for this, sorry i've only just seen this post.
EDIT, put the diodes in the right direction lol, am asleep again.