Back checking the intuition:

Quote

It all connects together and makes sense: electrical energy spews out of the battery, runs roughly parallel to the connecting wires, then dives into the resistor/bulb-filament; entering the tungsten surface at right angles. At the same time the currents in the wires are connected to or "causing" the magnetic field, and the voltage across the wires is connected to or "causes" the electric field.

There's one big problem with all of this: it's only ever presented to 4th-year engineering students! Them, and at graduate level physics, but not to undergrads or to high school students. It's not found in technician course materials (except perhaps in radio tech courses, and then never applied to DC circuits, phone cables, or 60Hz power lines.) Probably this is done because the math homework would be far beyond a beginning student, and any textbook chapters about the above topics MUST ALWAYS HAVE math homework, right?, right? :) Forget that! We can just explain it all verbally, and draw pictures as above. No math allowed. Don't aim it at electrical engineers, instead do it for "Einstein's Audience," where Einstein doesn't truely understand a topic unless he can explain it to his grandmother.


shareciteimprove this answer edited Apr 7 '16 at 5:45 answered Apr 7 '16 at 1:47
 
wbeaty
95959

https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/221053/path-of-em-wave-propagation-in-a-circuit-wire

This is about getting concepts across to people of various levels of experience and background.

In the above post the link describes someone who asks a question. The asker has in his head held a closed minded belief.
Someone somewhere in his life told him waves emanate from the source in one direction and continue a long way in space.

He asks why in a rectangular flat wire loop with a current the magnetic wave does not continue outward in a straight line in space
past the wire at the corner bend. He appears to think the wave source is geo located at the initial contact on the wire (like a directional speaker horn for example). He does not know that the source is the current all along the wire emanating in all directions and weakening over distance but with more of a 90 degree to surrounding directional orientation. Even the main wire source orientation would be closer to 90 degree from the source along length of wire at the corner bend not 0 degree. They have to go back and forth several times over that one point.

Some people would think about that but he sticks to what somewhat told him is the truth without regard to the conditions where that
made that belief hold true. In time he might conceptualize or he might let that fly by thinking only one or the other can be true not entirely understanding. He might be asking why so many people told him and believe the sound byte "a wave emanates in one direction a long way in space from the source."  He could have tested this himself to see what is true and looked at it. Time...     

Lots of thoughts going on here... 

I'm reading them if I don't respond...  Its just becuse I haven't the time. 

Here is the new comutator. 

I still need to do the brushes.  But the main components.

110 on 35 short 35 off repeat... 

Can remove the short as well. 

I guess 45 on but the mesuremnts show we can go with 120. So I went in the sweet spot of110.

Will try to finish the brushes later tonight. 

Before everyone jumps the gun...

This is dezighned for 110v as we know when we need to fire the rotor to achieve negtive current @ x rpm. 

So the goal of this comutator is to test speed of allways on 110 degrees.  To see what rpm we can achieve. 

Then test the short to keep the current flowing for the rest of the cycle. 

See where we need to go from there as far as timming...

And speed on 110v

~Russ

Russ,

Okay so you are changing from 20 firing cycles per revolution to two firing cycles per revolution with the assumption that this will give you a higher RPM.  Let's assume (or take a guess) based on what we have seen so far that the motor will spin at 120 RPM with the new commutator.  So that's two revolutions per second.

Doing the math:

110 on firing = 153 milliseconds
35 short = 49 milliseconds
35 off = 49 milliseconds

It looks like you will have a continuous transition from firing to the short, so I will assume that there will be no plasma burn at that transition.  I am assuming that you have worked out a way to keep the shorting of the batteries to a bare minimum.  Assuming that the time constant for the coil is about 150 milliseconds, then we will assume that there will still be current flowing through the coil after the 49 milliseconds of the shorting phase.  So after the shorting phase there will be a plasma burn that burns off the remaining energy in the coil.

So here is the preliminary energy analysis:

During the firing pulse, I already showed how you can with the aid of your DSO and some simple math divide the energy in the firing pulse up into three components:  1) resistive losses in the coil, 2) energy in the magnetic field of the coil at the end of the firing pulse, and 3) the mechanical energy put into the spinning rotor magnet.

Now let's look at what happens during the shorting cycle:

For starters we know the amount of current flowing through the coil so we know how much magnetic energy there is in the coil.  This magnetic energy can be divided up into three components:  1) resistive losses in the coil, 2) energy in the magnetic field of the coil at the end of the shorting cycle, 3) the mechanical push on the rotor during the shorting cycle.

So calculating the resistive losses (1) in the coil during the shorting cycle is easy.  One more time the DSO can give you the RMS current measurement during the shorting cycle and you know the resistance of the coil and the length of the pulse.  Therefore you can calculate the resistive losses in the coil during the shorting cycle.

You can easily calculate the remaining magnetic field energy in the coil at the end of the shorting cycle (2) because you know the current level and the inductance of the coil.  Note that this energy also becomes the amount of energy in the plasma burn at the end of the shorting cycle.

So how do we measure the mechanical push on the rotor (3) during the shorting cycle?  That's another easy one, it's just the initial magnetic energy in the coil at the start of the shorting cycle minus the resistive losses in the coil during the shorting cycle minus the final magnetic energy in the coil at the end of the shorting cycle:

Mechanical energy put into rotor during shorting cycle = (coil energy at start of shorting) - (resistive looses during shorting) - (coil energy at end of shorting)

When you get the plasma burn cycle it is so fast that we can ignore any resistive losses in the coil and any mechanical push on the rotor.

So, if you are following this you can see how we made some measurements with our DSO and crunched some numbers and we end up calculating two mechanical pushes on the rotor, the first mechanical push is during the firing pulse, and the second mechanical push is during the shorting cycle.

So, those two mechanical pushes keep the rotor turning at a certain RPM, and I took a guess that it might be about 120 RPM.  So where does the energy in those two mechanical pushes per half-rotation cycle go?  The answer to that is trivial, it goes into bearing friction energy and air friction energy.  The mechanical push energy becomes heat energy.

And that is the (preliminary) pretty complete energy pie for the motor.

SS

Thank you SS,  verry good run down,  I do have a curve ball though, 

You for got to add in the induction current...  This is where all this falls apart.  Becuse we know expermenraly thst if I can get to 120rpm,  we will have current goin in the negtive direction and Voltage  above the battery voltage... At this point all your last tests provide no help,  as the battery and current are going up...  We need to start to calulate the reverse,  Altho some of the things you want to mesure are still valid. And will be very helpfull. 

Also. Note thst there is at the moment there is a short gap between the short and the fire,  and a short gap between the short and the "gap"

110+110+35+35 = 290

We have 6 "breakes"

So we have about 11,6 or more degreese between each transition. 

Thanks for the deep input. 

Also,  did you see how hastings mesured and calulated the power in the TXT file of his report?  as you are speeking his lanuage with the math.  Yoi might see if his way of mesuring makes More or Less Sence.  That would be verry helpfull as richard has been goong over those formulas.

~Russ

Russ,

No problem, I am just giving you a framework to work with.  If there is a reverse current charging the battery then that simply means that the framework could then be adapted to that reality.  Likewise with any gaps between the firing cycle and the shorting cycle, etc.

For example, with a gap between the firing cycle and the shorting cycle you will see a steep drop in the current flow in the coil.  Therefore you can calculate the resistive losses in the coil during the plasma burn and the magnetic energy drop in the coil during the plasma burn.  Therefore we know that the magnetic energy drop in the coil less the resistive losses in the coil during the plasma burn is almost 100% attributable to the plasma burn itself.  Hence we can measure how much energy was burned off in the actual plasma burn itself.

I am withholding judgement about the reverse current recharging the battery until you demonstrate that on the bench with your DSO while the motor is running at its steady-state speed without any assistance from hand cranking.  I previously stated that any reverse current flow will charge the battery and also put a magnetic brake on the motor where the push on the rotor during the reverse current flow will be in the opposite direction of the rotation.  So my gut feel is this will self-regulate and at the steady state speed of the rotor any reverse current flow will be minimal at best.  And like I already stated, nothing is stopping adding this component to the energy analysis of the motor.  For example, if and when the current reverses, you can still measure the resistive energy losses in the coil during this phase.

One comment about using the fancy clamp-on current probes.  For whatever reason, the signals from the current probes seem to have fuzzy noise on them.  I am not sure why, perhaps it is because the current levels are at the very low end for the probes?  Since the coil is about 45 kohm in resistance, adding something like a 100 or 200-ohm current sensing resistor would not really affect the operation of the coil and it might give you a cleaner signal than the fancy current probes.  I don't really know, I am just throwing that idea out there for you.

SS

Quote from SqueezingSparks on February 3rd, 2018, 10:10 AM

Russ,

No problem, I am just giving you a framework to work with.  If there is a reverse current charging the battery then that simply means that the framework could then be adapted to that reality.  Likewise with any gaps between the firing cycle and the shorting cycle, etc.

For example, with a gap between the firing cycle and the shorting cycle you will see a steep drop in the current flow in the coil.  Therefore you can calculate the resistive losses in the coil during the plasma burn and the magnetic energy drop in the coil during the plasma burn.  Therefore we know that the magnetic energy drop in the coil less the resistive losses in the coil during the plasma burn is almost 100% attributable to the plasma burn itself.  Hence we can measure how much energy was burned off in the actual plasma burn itself.

I am withholding judgement about the reverse current recharging the battery until you demonstrate that on the bench with your DSO while the motor is running at its steady-state speed without any assistance from hand cranking.  I previously stated that any reverse current flow will charge the battery and also put a magnetic brake on the motor where the push on the rotor during the reverse current flow will be in the opposite direction of the rotation.  So my gut feel is this will self-regulate and at the steady state speed of the rotor any reverse current flow will be minimal at best.  And like I already stated, nothing is stopping adding this component to the energy analysis of the motor.  For example, if and when the current reverses, you can still measure the resistive energy losses in the coil during this phase.

One comment about using the fancy clamp-on current probes.  For whatever reason, the signals from the current probes seem to have fuzzy noise on them.  I am not sure why, perhaps it is because the current levels are at the very low end for the probes?  Since the coil is about 45 kohm in resistance, adding something like a 100 or 200-ohm current sensing resistor would not really affect the operation of the coil and it might give you a cleaner signal than the fancy current probes.  I don't really know, I am just throwing that idea out there for you.

SS

Yes,  there will be a regular effect I would also guess.  However the back current will over power the input IF the rpm is good.  (It only needs to be 60 or so to get over the hump,  so I suspect it will achieve this and we can see where we are at on the timing)

The current probes will mesure down to 1ma.  In thst range there is some noise. 

I can't mesure the resister drop for the same Reasion.  My differential probes are not sensitive enugh.  There for 6000v and 600v.  Pk-pk
So mesuring micro amps on a 1ma drop is impossible. 

I meed isolation.  So a new set of probes for low voltage is 8k Or so...  At the moment that any goina fly. But hope I will get them at some point.

The large magent interferes with the current probe from 8/feet away when on the low settings... 

All thses small details are noted as I work through each experment. 

~Russ

surround the current probe in a magnetic shield material like tin.

Russ,

Quote

I can't mesure the resister drop for the same Reasion.  My differential probes are not sensitive enugh.  There for 6000v and 600v.  Pk-pk
So mesuring micro amps on a 1ma drop is impossible.

I am not sure what you mean here.  You don't need differential probes to do the current sensing.  Nor do I think sensitivity will be a problem.  Also, I don't think the presence of the big rotating magnet will affect the reading of a conventional scope channel probe but if it does you can route the scope cable along the spinning axis of the rotor to minimize any possible magnetic coupling.

If you use a 100-ohm current sensing resistor it will only have a very slight effect on the behaviour of the 45 kohm coil.

I am going to assume you are going to have a 200-volt power source and the coil is 45 kohm.   Here is the setup:

<200 volts> ---> <big coil> ---> <100-ohm current sensing resistor> ---> <battery ground>

With a 200-volt power supply after the current stabilizes it would be 4.43 milliamps.  Therefore the voltage across the 100-ohm resistor would be 0.443 volts.  I believe your DSO should be able to digitize that signal as clear as a bell and give you a crystal clear view of the current flow through the coil.

I just realized that you also want to measure the battery current.  So that's easy also, the battery can get a current sensing resistor also at the ground terminal.  Since we are now using two current sensing resistors and we assume that the scope will have no problems at all measuring a 0.22 volt signal at close to full-scale, here is the new setup:

<-200 volts+> ---> <big coil> ---> <50-ohm current sensing resistor> ---> <ground node>  ***
(AND)
<+200 volts-> <---- <50-ohm current sensing resistor> <--- <ground node>  ***

***  Note the "ground node" is now now very close to the actual battery ground, but it is separated by a 50-ohm resistor.  The scope channel grounds connect to the "ground node" to facilitate measuring the coil current and the battery current.  Note for the setup to work properly the ground reference for the commutator also has to be the "ground node."

So with two 50-ohm current sensing resistors and two regular scope probes connected between the CSRs and the "ground node" you should be able to monitor the battery current and the coil current without really disturbing the setup and hopefully get nice clean signals.  The battery current scope trace just needs to be inverted on the display to make it friendly.

SS

If we assume that the double-current sensing resistor setup was to be implemented by Russ and it worked well, it would be interesting to see the battery current stop flowing at the start of the coil shorting cycle, and then still see the current flowing through the coil during the shorting cycle.  That would be showing you the "hand off" of energy from the battery to the coil, almost like the energy is being passed around like a football.

Quote from SqueezingSparks on February 3rd, 2018, 02:02 PM

If we assume that the double-current sensing resistor setup was to be implemented by Russ and it worked well, it would be interesting to see the battery current stop flowing at the start of the coil shorting cycle, and then still see the current flowing through the coil during the shorting cycle.  That would be showing you the "hand off" of energy from the battery to the coil, almost like the energy is being passed around like a football.

This has ready been done,  and the current circulated for allmost 2x the time.  Calulating using the Area under the curve,  see eriler posts on this with scope  shots . 

~Russ

Quote from ~Russ on February 3rd, 2018, 02:57 PM

This has ready been done,  and the current circulated for allmost 2x the time.  Calulating using the Area under the curve,  see eriler posts on this with scope  shots . 

~Russ

A week or so ago I was watching one of your clips carefully, it might have been during a live stream.  You were doing some tests and the rotor was not spinning so it was out of the picture.  The current did not circulate for 2X the time.  I clearly saw on your DSO screen that the energizing curve and the discharging curve were the same.  When you energize the coil the energizing time constant is L/R.  When the coil is in shorting mode and discharging the discharge time constant is also L/R.  You need to double-check that.

If you don't switch the circuit fast enough,  dose not work right. 

Do find the post where I posted the screen shot of the post.  Haven't the time at the moment. 

However,  everything will be rechecked in due time.  I was waiting for the other coil to test better.  As this will also be modeld. So everything will be more clear.  Do find thst post.  Richard can testify,  he was there. 

~Russ

Russ,

I found the posting that you are talking about.  It's posting #1001 where you say this:

Quote

so the main point is to keep the inertia in the coil. some testing proved that you can get a longer duration in the coil than took to put it in by shorting it... In fact 2x longer in some tests...  ( see attached area under the curve consultations, blue trace is current in the coil, green is current from the battery, yellow is voltage across the coil) ( 0012,0013)

Unfortunately you are misleading yourself.  I am reposting two of your DSO captures and I renamed them.  The capture "less than one time constant.png" shows how you energized the coil for a short time, roughly a bit less than one time constant.  Therefore the trace shows the current rise is almost a straight line.  Then when the coil discharges you can see the blue current trace takes about five time constants to fully discharge.  This is all perfectly normal and that is what is supposed to happen.  The fact that the charging time is shorter than the discharge time has no real relevance.  You have control over how long the coil is charged, that is a variable.  In contrast, the amount of time it takes the coil to discharge is fixed and takes about five time constants where the time constant is L/R where L is the inductance of the coil and R is the resistance of the coil.

Now look at the next scope capture that I took from your posting and renamed as "almost five time constants.png,"  In this capture you charge the coil for a much longer time, almost five time constants.  Now the charging curve and the discharging curve look very similar.  So in this capture the charge and discharge curves look to be almost the same length in time.  This all makes perfect sense because the "L" obviously stays the same for the charging and the discharging and the "R" is almost the same for the charging and the discharging.  When you charge, the "R" is the coil resistance plus the internal resistance of the battery bank.  When you discharge, the "R" is the coil resistance.  Those two resistance values are almost the same therefore the charging and discharging time constants are almost the same.

SS

Greate obversations, 

Let's look at this closer, 

There are 2 key factors we have learned, 

1. We must play with the coil in a window,  not fully charged.

2. If the switch is not fast enugh we lose energy in the coil to the water hammer effect.  (BEMF as I define  it,)

So let's look at the 2 shots closer, 

The first one,  less than one time constent, 

You can see I nail the 2 points I mentiond. 

Not fully charged,  and switched fast enugh to not lose much energy to the switch.  So this is what we want IF we want to keep the magnetic feild for rotating the magnet. 

The second one,  allmost 5 Times. 

This one I miss both of the key factors I mentiond.  I charged it to long,  and I let alot of the stored energy out via slow switching.  (See the spikes in the shot? Those are losses IF the goal was to keep the magnetic feild going with a short)

So with that said it seems that If We dont charge it fully,  and we short it fast enugh,  we can use that stored energy and keep the feild (even tho slowely decaying) in the coil to help keep the magent going past that point where we switch it off. 

So,  I'm glad your goong over my data as its verry helpfull to see. 

So please take thses 2 new points in to cisitration and let me. Know your thoughts. 

Thanks!! 

~Russ

Russ,

Some general points about energizing (or charging) a coil:

When you first apply the voltage across the coil almost 100% of the battery power goes into building up the magnetic field and therefore that is almost a 100% efficient energy conversion process  (battery energy to magnetic field energy).

After five time constants, more than 99% of the battery power is burnt off in the resistance of the coil, and therefore the efficiency is less than 1% and quickly heading towards zero.

So in almost all power conversion circuits (like DC-to-DC converters) the coils are switched at high frequency and they are energized for only a small fraction of a time constant before they output their stored energy into some other part of the circuit, which is typically a capacitor.

Quote

This one I miss both of the key factors I mentiond.  I charged it to long,  and I let alot of the stored energy out via slow switching.  (See the spikes in the shot? Those are losses IF the goal was to keep the magnetic feild going with a short)

On the second DSO capture, yes there are spikes, but look at the blue coil current trace before and after the switching spikes.  The current level does not take a big jump down so very little coil energy was lost due to the spikes.  Also, notice the second big spike in the coil current after the main spikes?  That shows that the coil current took a big jump down and then jumped back up.  In fact that almost certainly didn't actually happen and it is just some unexplained artifact/glitch associated with the clamp-on current probe.

So there are two energy loss mechanisms to think about, (1) the one associated with the battery getting energy into the coil, and (2) the one associated with the switching process and the energy that is stored in the coil.

(1) energizing the coil for too long
(2) slow switching causing voltage spikes and an associated dissipation of coil energy through the resistance (or plasma) that caused that voltage spike.

Quote

So with that said it seems that If We dont charge it fully,  and we short it fast enugh,  we can use that stored energy and keep the feild (even tho slowely decaying) in the coil to help keep the magent going past that point where we switch it off.

The above is true and like I said, you can using your DSO and some simple math measure and calculate both mechanical pushes on the rotor, both resistive losses in the coil, and any energy lost due to switching and/or plasma burns.

SS

So what would be the most efficient way to make the rotor turn?  There is no "right" answer here and it all depends on your design goals.  You have to keep in mind that the faster the rotor turns then the more the losses are to bearing and air friction.  I can't remember but I think it is proportional to the square or cube of the angular velocity.

All that being said, what about it?  Also what is the metric that defines "efficiency?"  Let's say it is angular velocity per watt of power consumption.  Then you can assume the higher the power you apply (increasing voltage) for a fixed motor configuration somewhere there is a sweet spot.  So that means there is a "sweet" motor configuration and a sweet spot as you ramp up the power and associated RPM, as an example.

Well, there is no point in firing the coil when the rotor angle is far away from the sweet spot for imparting torque onto the rotor.  So if we say that zero degrees is when the rotor is aligned with the coil's magnetic field then there is zero torque at zero and 180 degrees and presumably maximum torque at 90 and 270 degrees.  So if we fire pulses from say 45 to 135 degrees and 225 degrees to 315 degrees that would be good.  And then we would want to preferably keep the pulses short to try to minimize the resistive losses and also perhaps have a shorting cycle between pulses to get torque on the rotor during the shorting cycles.

All this is fine and dandy, but I am wondering if this thought experiment is going off track for what you are trying to do.  So what if you can optimize the pulse firing to make the rotor spin as efficiently as possible.  Does that really have anything to do with what a Newman motor is supposed to do?  I am discussing it like I was going to build an efficient pulse motor for the pulse motor build off, but is that really what you want?

If I actually was building a "most efficient" pulse motor in a "Newman" configuration then I would get rid of the commutator completely and use transistors and optical or magnetic triggering, etc.  Then with short pulses and restricting the angle where you fire the pulses you would get something really efficient because you eliminate the friction associated with the mechanical commutator.

SS

@For you all
I have found a rare documentations, most of them are from (1991-1996) Ralph M. Hartwell II (Ralph Hartwell) you don't know who that is ? then maybe you should watch Newman Movie again :D or at least first 5 minutes of it.
Just in case someone would want to read all 8 Parts, i'm gonna provide you with the link but the true reason why i'm posting it is Part 2, Part 4 and Part 5, the rest is less important (but interesting) and some was already posted but anyway here they are .

Important Parts:

Part 2, UTILIZATION OF THE NEWMAN MOTOR/GENERATOR
http://www.padrak.com/ine/NEWMAN2.html
- Newman made a table saw that is powered with 5500 volts (batteries in a series), 800 to 1200 RPM and draws about 25 to 30 watts under load.

Part 4, DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS FOR ROTATING MAGNET NEWMAN MOTORS (This part is very important)
http://www.padrak.com/ine/NEWMAN4.html
-THE COIL OPERATING VOLTAGES
-Wire gauge from 8 to 32 and why the diameter matter in usage with low and high voltages.
-Output voltages of 50 times the input voltage and so much more that i have to sum it
-THE COIL - OPERATING VOLTAGES
-THE MAGNET
-THE COIL
-WINDING THE COIL
-INSULATION CONSIDERATIONS

Part 5, COMMUTATORS FOR NEWMAN MOTORS - AN OVERVIEW
http://www.padrak.com/ine/NEWMAN5.html
-OVERVIEW OF THE PROBLEM
-STANDARD vs NEWMAN COMMUTATORS
-OPERATIONAL CONSIDERATIONS

--------------------------------------------------
Now the less important Parts:

Part 1, THE ENERGY MACHINE OF JOSEPH WESTLEY NEWMAN
https://web.archive.org/web/19970627045528/http://www.padrak.com:80/ine/NEWMAN.html

Part 3, NEWMAN'S THEORY: A Report
http://www.padrak.com/ine/NEWMAN3.html

Part 6, THE POSSIBILITY OF INTERACTION OF TACHYON GRAVITY FIELDS IN THE NEWMAN MOTOR AND OTHER ENERGY RELEASING DEVICES USING MOVING MAGNETS
http://www.padrak.com/ine/NEWMAN6.html

Part 7, THEFT OF NEWMAN TECHNOLOGY: UPDATE
http://www.padrak.com/ine/NEWMAN7.html

Part 8, REPORT ON THE JOSEPH NEWMAN MOTOR LECTURE AND DEMONSTRATION 9/12-14/98, PHOENIX, AZ
http://www.padrak.com/ine/NEWMAN8.html

That is all for now, enjoy :)

For permanent record Tavote.  Here at OSE  :-)

Question for Russ....


Remember us talking about the legacy "induction coils"?

They were the old buzz-box coils.

So let me pose something here...

What if we use a very simple commutator that just swaps the polarity and insert in series with this a frequency controllable buzz-box.

Would that not allow us to hit the most optimal frequency for our coil regardless of the magnet RPM?

The whole idea is to break the current flow before it closes the loop right?  That and keeping the copper atoms constantly aligned.

Check my thoughts here.

Thanks Tavote,

I have been collecting a lot of old data as well, i read most of those,
I'm attaching my current collection, more to go...

Thanks for posting,

~Russ

Quote from Matt Watts on February 5th, 2018, 09:01 PM

Question for Russ....


Remember us talking about the legacy "induction coils"?

They were the old buzz-box coils.

So let me pose something here...

What if we use a very simple commutator that just swaps the polarity and insert in series with this a frequency controllable buzz-box.

Would that not allow us to hit the most optimal frequency for our coil regardless of the magnet RPM?

The whole idea is to break the current flow before it closes the loop right?  That and keeping the copper atoms constantly aligned.

Check my thoughts here.

Yes Matt,

The idea is to A, make a motor, B make a generator.

This can be done with Newmans work.

But its kinda what you want. You have an option,
do you want RF output and no rotary?
or do you want mechanical output?

or both? RF and Rotary power?

I would like to get to option 3, Both,

so we need to fully understand the mechanical part of this with no RF, an make a motor / generator ( it really is both) using induction to get revere current.. This is what I'm working on now, but I'm not so sure this coil will give that with the magnet on the outside, (i need better flux copping it seems. )

So this current coil ( Richards) might be best used with the RF output, as it so seems he also did with this type of coil ( after watching the press conference from oct 9 ,1985, that unit was only RF output, NOTE FOR OTHERS TO UNDERSTAND THIS IS IMPORTANT AS WELL AS THE TIME LINE WHEN THIS OCCURRED)

Then, after we master that mechanical part, we can switch the commutator " like a buzz box" to reach the second goal of RF / current in the coil not getting through,  however letting the coil regulate its own frequency might not be the ideal way of doing it. That will need to be tested. because the buzz box relies on mechanical switching that is regulated by the magnetic field and the "spring" holding the switch. as you noted, it will be regulated from the outside, 

so we may or may not be able to do the fast part of the switching with solid state...

Theses thing all need to be testes still.

so what I'm saying is that currently i would like to focus on the induction / torque output and shorting / tuning with caps / florescent lights first, as its seems a lot more comprehensive and doable with out confusion or to many questions. its more straight forward ( just like the mechanical way of thinking you have down so good)

but, the current problem is is flux coupling. so there for do we focus on fast switching and RF? id say no, as there is still some questions to answer with the induction part of things.
such as, ( lets see if you can MECHANICALY think this one out Matt)  :

 If there is voltage and current in the coil from the battery, ( lets say 100V @ +1ma) and then we induce more voltage in the coil than we are putting in so that the current is going backwards, (110V @ -1ma)  10.what happens to the magnet field? 11.is it still going in the same direction or is is stopped / nall'd? 12.or is it reversed as the meters say (negative)?

13.If its reversed is the magnetic field also reversed?  14.dose the current need to be going in the correct direction to keep the magnetic field in the same polarity if there is 100V and +1ma already applied? 15.we never changed the polarity of the voltage applied, only the current direction?

all things that are slightly confusion. because yes, you can induce more current and voltage than it takes to run IN THE SAME DIRECTION,
BUT, the current is now going IN THE WRONG DIRECTION.... but yet the magnet still wants to spin? hummm...

that's something to think about, see if each of you can take on this questions. ( i labeled them for you )

~Russ

notes and shots from today attached HERE

Russ,
As regards the magnet being outside the coil, couldn't one use a core top and bottom of the coil, and merely shift the commutator 90 degrees to get the same effect as if the magnet were inside the coil?

Quote from ~Russ on February 5th, 2018, 09:44 PM

such as, ( lets see if you can MECHANICALY think this one out Matt)  :

all things that are slightly confusion. because yes, you can induce more current and voltage than it takes to run IN THE SAME DIRECTION,
BUT, the current is now going IN THE WRONG DIRECTION.... but yet the magnet still wants to spin? hummm...

that's something to think about, see if each of you can take on this questions. ( i labeled them for you )

Question:

How is it possible to connect a power source to a coil, then disconnect this power source from the coil before (based on the speed of light) electrical energy can get to the opposite end of the coil?

You posed that question already.  Let me add to it...

How does a current ever possibly build up in the above question?


You have to think about this mechanically, because logically with "modern electrical engineering" current could not possibly flow right?

What does that tell you about polarity?

It should tell you this:

You must setup a polarity difference in order to facilitate propagation.  Propagation of what though?

I say, a mechanical wave takes place.  Mechanical because of the gyroscopic particles.  They swing or deflect due to the polarity they find themselves caught between.  When a gyrotron (simplified term) swings, it imposes a collision or friction to all the gyrotrons next to it.  The slow movement of these gyrotrons is what we see as the parallel resonance.  The rapid snap back of these gyrotrons is what we see as the series resonance.  Play with a gyroscope for a while and you'll soon experience these motions.  Certain positions and motions will allow you to move the gyroscope in a very fluid like manner; other motions will make the gyroscope snap/flip with extreme reactions.  These later motions are not linear.

When you put it all together, don't forget any one gyrotron directly effects all the neighboring gyrotrons and these neighboring gyrotrons effect all their immediate neighbors as well as the initial gyrotron.  This is mechanical wave theory at its most basic level and it all starts with some sort of polarity change.  Once started, all gyrotrons affected and will remain affected for as long as the wave action can sustain itself, typically until the energy is radiated away.  All this mechanical action creates new polarity changes, nodes, reflections and such.

Juice up your pineal gland and hopefully you can begin to visualize it.


While you are playing with your gyroscope, see if you can find a sequence of movements that quickly slow down the spinning or actually make it speed up.  If you can do that, you have mastered the tempic field.  I'll give you a hint, you'll need at least three spinning gyroscopes.

Russ,

Quote

If there is voltage and current in the coil from the battery, ( lets say 100V @ +1ma) and then we induce more voltage in the coil than we are putting in so that the current is going backwards, (110V @ -1ma)  10.what happens to the magnet field? 11.is it still going in the same direction or is is stopped / nall'd? 12.or is it reversed as the meters say (negative)?

13.If its reversed is the magnetic field also reversed?  14.dose the current need to be going in the correct direction to keep the magnetic field in the same polarity if there is 100V and +1ma already applied? 15.we never changed the polarity of the voltage applied, only the current direction?

This is where you have an opportunity to answer all of these questions yourself.  After all, you have the setup and the scope and all of the equipment.  This is where you sit down in front of your setup with a pencil, an eraser, and some graph paper and you develop timing diagrams like I described in an earlier posting.   You make timing diagrams for the simple basic tests you mentioned.  You annotate them explaining what the signals are and what they do and and show any interdependencies between signals.  You can even add your own virtual signals for things like electrical work or energy and mechanical work or energy.

What really happens when the current reverses and starts flowing into the battery?  All of that can be explained with a timing diagram.

In the best-case scenario you end up with some nice timing diagrams to use for your own reference and also for the people following this thread.

SS