BobZilla's Custom Build

[min2oly]

Ahh ok i got you, you want to see the width.

I will try to get a pot and a light hooked up tomorrow. Sorry man I am not focused on this very well. I have been fooling around with the machine checking out other stuff. The new wheel lets me get back to more of the things I am used to playing with on smaller machines. I have been going back and comparing some results from old stuff to the new machine to better understand how a multi coiler behaves. GEN mode runs like a dream on this thing now but of course the new wheel also pulls a lot more juice because of the longer on times in either mode.

I Paid $150 bucks for that wheel fabrication plus magnets and axle/bearings. Probably close to $200 all said and done.

Hi Bob - No worries.
"I" don't want you to do anything. Only do it if you want to see it. You already see that you can affect the number of times it shuts off from one coil to the next with a little resistance - and truly that is enough :-)



1. so once that is set then we talk about amplitude - does it really matter if the amplitude is different from one wire to the next as long as they all shut off simultaneously?

2. does the time they turn ON really matter as long as they all turn off at the same time?

re. 1,2 - I relinquish that the efficiency will go down ever so slightly, some fraction of a percent but not enough that we should be concerned since we are trying to obtain 4:1 or even 12:1 right... as long as the principle is sound. 16 hammers acting simultaneously on one spot can affect the concrete wall as a giant sludge. This is the OFF timing.

and if the above does not matter, then why match ALL transistors why not just match the set of transistors that are on each coil? of course this should only be true if you have a scope, otherwise there is no way to adjust the OFF precisely from one coil to the next that I know of.


Cheers - Patrick

ps. you can remove that resistor on the fly as long as you are not touching any of it to the hot rail, or you can put it in beforehand, shunt it with a clip lead and remove it on the fly....

[BobZilla]

Ahh ok i got you, you want to see the width.

I will try to get a pot and a light hooked up tomorrow. Sorry man I am not focused on this very well. I have been fooling around with the machine checking out other stuff. The new wheel lets me get back to more of the things I am used to playing with on smaller machines. I have been going back and comparing some results from old stuff to the new machine to better understand how a multi coiler behaves. GEN mode runs like a dream on this thing now but of course the new wheel also pulls a lot more juice because of the longer on times in either mode.

I Paid $150 bucks for that wheel fabrication plus magnets and axle/bearings. Probably close to $200 all said and done.

[min2oly]

Patrick you were right Sir ;-()

I ran some tests with my meters and I believe it demonstrates what you have been saying. I did not use the LED method but I think it shows what is important, if not it has at least opened my eyes a bit wider.

Thank you for your persistence! Theory is no substitute for bench testing and I was wrong in my theory, plain and simple.

The video explains how I tested but it is worth noting that the first part was a baseline which clearly establishes that the two test boards were operating exactly the same prior to base resistance manipulation. I think other things could throw different results such as gaps being different but the baseline shows that they were the same and only the resistance change could account for the finding.


Link:
https://files.secureserver.net/0sEzyk3ohDZJjw

Hi Bob,
I like those wheels are you having them made locally? what do they cost? I'm just thinking down the line :-)


it looks like the side coil was driven into multiple spikes per magnet pass. that's why I suggested a pot or 10 ohms resistor (after watch vid I might go 5ohms), pot would be best. the frequency should stay the same, it's the length of the pulse we are trying to change. Nice one using the meter though. I believe that meter also has a duty and width setting you can play with:

1. Rotate the function selector to Hz/Duty.
2. To select the frequency function,
repeatedly press SELECT until Hz, kHz,
or MHz appears.
3. Press RANGE to manually select the
range, then repeatedly press RANGE
until the desired range appears.
4. To select the duty cycle function,
repeatedly press SELECT until %
appears.
5. Connect the black test probe to a ground
reference for the signal, and connect the
red test probe to the signal source.
http://support.radioshack.com/suppor...oc67/67321.pdf

I have not used this function so I can't be much help. If I lived down the block I would have those led's wired up and delivered already :-)
KR - Patrick A.

[BobZilla]

Patrick you were right Sir ;-()

I ran some tests with my meters and I believe it demonstrates what you have been saying. I did not use the LED method but I think it shows what is important, if not it has at least opened my eyes a bit wider.

Thank you for your persistence! Theory is no substitute for bench testing and I was wrong in my theory, plain and simple.

The video explains how I tested but it is worth noting that the first part was a baseline which clearly establishes that the two test boards were operating exactly the same prior to base resistance manipulation. I think other things could throw different results such as gaps being different but the baseline shows that they were the same and only the resistance change could account for the finding.


Link:
https://files.secureserver.net/0sEzyk3ohDZJjw

[min2oly]

Ok Patrick I will rustle up a few LED's and setup as your describing.

On my machine I have 4 power windings to each board and the boards are fed trigger through resistors and bulbs. If I put led's across one power winding on two different boards and change the resistance at the bulb/resistor junction on one of the boards would this demonstrate what your saying? What I mean is we would be basically changing the trigger resistance on two boards, not individual windings but boards.

yes :-)
if I'm understanding you correctly... as long as you are making the resistance going to one board different than the resistance going to another board. If you have an extra POT that would be best so you can start it from zero then increase gradually. If you do not have an extra POT large enough use a 10 ohm resistor to start... And, you should have two separate led's one for each coil. Just point them to the same piece of tape.

[BobZilla]

Ok Patrick I will rustle up a few LED's and setup as your describing.

On my machine I have 4 power windings to each board and the boards are fed trigger through resistors and bulbs. If I put led's across one power winding on two different boards and change the resistance at the bulb/resistor junction on one of the boards would this demonstrate what your saying? What I mean is we would be basically changing the trigger resistance on two boards, not individual windings but boards.

[min2oly]

Hi Patrick,

Sorry I do not have a scope, always wanted one but I have done ok so far without it.



I quoted that part just because this potion of the response is directly to that. So I think what your saying may be possible but let me explain what I think could be the cause. You are focusing on timing of the collapse or the spike, however we want to look at it. In my view this could be manipulated as you say by more and less resistance but it is a by product of the amplitude of the signal. Let me put it this way, take coil A and lets say it's base has 100 Ohm and coil B has 200 Ohm. Lets pretend here we are only talking about single wires not a "coil" with 4. So if we are hitting both with the same trigger they obviously get the same input voltage and current from the trigger but once we hit the base resistor things change. Coil A will open the base of the transistor more because the resistor is less and the current is more from the trigger signal,, this in turn allows the coil to charge a bit faster and fuller than the same input on coil B would. So now we are talking about amplitude and capacitance in the coil. Coil A would basically be stronger than B. Now when the magnet passes and the trigger (same on both) stops feeding the base then I would guess coil B to close faster because the coil did not "charge" capacitance as much,,say under saturated if you will. It collapses faster hence a perception of quicker switching time. Coil A would seem slower but that is only because it had more capacity/amplitude because of the base resistance allowing more current to flow from E to C. In short coil A would seem slower but would yeild a larger spike while coil B would seem quicker but have less to collapse and produce a little weaker spike.

Of course this is all just theory but looking at it this way I could see Patrick how the "time" could be affected by variable base resistances. Does this make any sense, or align with what your saying?




I can say with certainty that the trigger on my master coil recieves a lot of energy from cross induction with the power windings. This can easily be seen on any of my slave coils where the unused trigger is dangling in the wind. I can get serious voltages if I connect a meter to one of them but as soon as the machine is cut off it drops dramatically and then it is only the natural generator action from the wheel spin.

Note to all:
I don't want to sound like a know it all, I don't. I'm not even sure about things I think I know sometimes but I think through discussing these things with others we all benefit from each others point of view and that is why I try to explain things as I see them. Take it all with a grain of salt, I do.

Hey Bob,
I think this is a good conversation and perhaps others can learn from it. I could easily put this to rest with a simple video showing scope shot of two h waves being controlled as I describe. I don’t have such a big ego to say you have to take my word for it. So for a moment, forget about the amplitude, that only serves to change the subject. Let’s focus on the duty.

All I ask is for those who want to put the subject to rest, place an led+protective resistor across coil1 – do the same to coil2, place the reflective/white tape on the wheel that will show the led, you will see you can control the duty (time that the transistor is ON) by increasing or lowering the resistance.

This is the point; if the transistors are turning off at different times then we are not taking advantage of the one big kick. This is ONE of the purposes of matching the transistors so they shut off at the same time. I only want to focus on that one subject, the time of shut off. This is when the spike happens.

I could say more on amplitude, time the transistor turns on, time it takes the transistor to fully open etc... but let's at least put the subject to rest that from coil to coil we can control the time the transistor turns off by other means than matching the transistors across a 10 coil 40 transistor build. Again, I'm not saying that is not a good thing. I'm not saying JB did not do that. All I'm saying is we can control the time we shut it off by other means, we can also delay the time it turns on
KR - Patrick A.

[BobZilla]

Hi Patrick,

Sorry I do not have a scope, always wanted one but I have done ok so far without it.

Even with an led across each of the coils you can see that the moment the transistor shuts OFF can be controlled by the pot and you can have one coil shutting off at a different time than the other. I think you used the word amplitude, but would you accept that you can also change the duty with the resistance to the base?

I quoted that part just because this potion of the response is directly to that. So I think what your saying may be possible but let me explain what I think could be the cause. You are focusing on timing of the collapse or the spike, however we want to look at it. In my view this could be manipulated as you say by more and less resistance but it is a by product of the amplitude of the signal. Let me put it this way, take coil A and lets say it's base has 100 Ohm and coil B has 200 Ohm. Lets pretend here we are only talking about single wires not a "coil" with 4. So if we are hitting both with the same trigger they obviously get the same input voltage and current from the trigger but once we hit the base resistor things change. Coil A will open the base of the transistor more because the resistor is less and the current is more from the trigger signal,, this in turn allows the coil to charge a bit faster and fuller than the same input on coil B would. So now we are talking about amplitude and capacitance in the coil. Coil A would basically be stronger than B. Now when the magnet passes and the trigger (same on both) stops feeding the base then I would guess coil B to close faster because the coil did not "charge" capacitance as much,,say under saturated if you will. It collapses faster hence a perception of quicker switching time. Coil A would seem slower but that is only because it had more capacity/amplitude because of the base resistance allowing more current to flow from E to C. In short coil A would seem slower but would yeild a larger spike while coil B would seem quicker but have less to collapse and produce a little weaker spike.

Of course this is all just theory but looking at it this way I could see Patrick how the "time" could be affected by variable base resistances. Does this make any sense, or align with what your saying?

I still contend, and no one addressed this, there is something very basic that goes on in a single coil that will not take place from one coil to another and that is the reason we want the transistors on one coil to all be matched. if we can get them matched across all coils, this is icing on the cake, however coil to coil we can control via the branch resistor.

I can say with certainty that the trigger on my master coil recieves a lot of energy from cross induction with the power windings. This can easily be seen on any of my slave coils where the unused trigger is dangling in the wind. I can get serious voltages if I connect a meter to one of them but as soon as the machine is cut off it drops dramatically and then it is only the natural generator action from the wheel spin.

Note to all:
I don't want to sound like a know it all, I don't. I'm not even sure about things I think I know sometimes but I think through discussing these things with others we all benefit from each others point of view and that is why I try to explain things as I see them. Take it all with a grain of salt, I do.

[min2oly]

@Patrick,

I am telling you only what was given me, so from the very beginning I have built a certain way. matched trannies, matched coils, big wire to the batteries, matched magnets, never matched the number of rods!! for solid state shottky diodes too. my biggest problem has always been timing, getting the coils to line up so they fire at exactly the same time. I had a lot of trouble with this at first as my problem was accurate magnet spacing. I am really glad you are building Patrick we all have things to share do not stop. and you are right it is in the battery. there are other factors here also when it comes to Charging... there are probably a ton of things I am still not doing right, and I can honestly say I have not tested it any other way than how it was shown to me to do it.

I will go back and watch number 2 again....


Tom C

Here's a single shot of the dancing h waves on John B's 10 coiler:

When you watch the vid you can see the wave moving slightly. My 3PM doesn't do that. My bike wheel does, precisely because the magnets and or coil's are off a bit.

Bob is right though, this will not effect when the transistor fires. Bob, I think you mentioned before that some of the things I was noting would not cause the transistors to fire at different times as long as they were all controlled by a single trigger coil. I can't remember if you have a scope or not, but have you placed a Pot in place where a "branched resistor" would go yet? Even with an led across each of the coils you can see that the moment the transistor shuts OFF can be controlled by the pot and you can have one coil shutting off at a different time than the other. I think you used the word amplitude, but would you accept that you can also change the duty with the resistance to the base? I think you can follow where that leads...

Sorry in advance - I tried to let it go couldn't do it :-)

I still contend, and no one addressed this, there is something very basic that goes on in a single coil that will not take place from one coil to another and that is the reason we want the transistors on one coil to all be matched. if we can get them matched across all coils, this is icing on the cake, however coil to coil we can control via the branch resistor.

Kind regards,
Patrick A

[BobZilla]

Hi Patrick,

For this machine I would say the cap is just about perfect. I used to run this same one on a two coiler 12v system and had a little bit of a hard time filling it fast enough. In the vid I just posted I am running just over 1A but at 24v, that is almost as low as I can go with this machine, a little lower when the primaries are lower but that is basically it. So if I wanted to fill it faster and dump faster I can run the machine a little harder and easily fill it up. The machine can run between 1 - 3 amps smoothly, then if I want too I can go up into 4 -5 A but that is a bit much for it. I like to keep my off period on the cap at least 1 second for a few reasons but mostly because the FET's don't heat up as much as they do with like a half second pulse. The other reason is Mr. Bedini has said on a few videos that you want a "rest" period between pulses. This machine does not run so well on gen mode, I think it is because of the super pole magnets so I do not use my "cap dancing" method on it which uses very fast dumps. You only get an advantage from that I think when in gen mode as you saw back on that SS video awhile ago. So for this machine in mode 1 I like somewhere around 1 - 2 second normal dump cycles.

Now as far as the chart, yes primarily it looks choppy like that because the meters only sample once per second and the dumps are 1.5 seconds so it catches it at slightly different values when it records, sort of a phasing issue with the meter. With that said you can observe something else however. Notice when we start out the green spikey area is much less and it increases as the charge battery climbs. This is because the battery is not as thirsty and the potential is not as wide so less current is flowing and the voltage is rising with nowhere else to go. When watching the cycle in the early part of the charge the cap was dumping around 30v but towards the end it was closer to 40 because the charge was not as willing to accept it. I also think that the primary was starting to get a little back spike towards the end, I mean geez it only dropped about half a volt over the whole run, granted it was a small target but still. One other thing I remember from my experiments a long time ago, higher voltage dumps produce some very interesting spike behavior from a cap, a secondary dipole event which is similar to the cap dance deal. Remember when I showed if I dumped at 40v I could pick up a 400v spike, if not it was somewhere in that old thread when I first started talking about the cap dance.

Oh and no I leave the meters hooked up all the time, at least lately. I am experimenting mostly with this machine right now so I need them. Later on when I know how I like to set things and I am just charging to use the batteries I usually remove all the meters.

Thanks for your interest in my work, I love talking about this stuff and you guys are probably the only people who understand any of it ;-)


*EDIT*
This is a link to that old thread section that I mentioned about the 400v spikes on a cap dump. Of course My understanding of things has improved since then but the basic information is still true.
http://www.energyscienceforum.com/sh...ll=1#post10845

[min2oly]

Greetings,

I did a cap-dump run on a garden battery, results below.

This was again series on the front and 12v on the back. The fronts were my 75AH.

The dump was set to 1300ms off,, 200ms on.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]4499[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]4500[/ATTACH]

And a video:
https://files.secureserver.net/0svb4VqZmabXdm

Hi Bob,

your cap dump circuit seems to be working very nicely! Are you satisfied with the cap you are using or would you tweak it out/change it out for something smaller and dump more often?

The tall spikes on the charge side are interesting, are we not seeing all of them because your meter is not catching them or is that actually a behavior of the charging battery or the cap dumping at different voltages or...?

Do you ever shunt the meters out on your runs or are the always inline?
Thanks - Patrick

[BobZilla]

Greetings,

I did a cap-dump run on a garden battery, results below.

This was again series on the front and 12v on the back. The fronts were my 75AH.

The dump was set to 1300ms off,, 200ms on.





And a video:
https://files.secureserver.net/0svb4VqZmabXdm

[BobZilla]

I have tried out some genny stuff on it but I will e honest,, it was not all to spectacular. That is actually one reason I want to get this new regualr pole wheel on there. I'm pretty sure I can get the RPM's much higher with it and I think that is what I need to really get some good juice from a genny.

All along the genny was just an added bonus in my view. I would love to get it working good but this machine is a beast for output even without it.

[aln]

Isn't that how things go, don't get too many irons in the fire now we are learning with you w/ this build, I personally can't wait to see some generator coils. Gonna post a question for you or Patrick on the phototherapy-grow light thread about the soldid state CPD mod, trying not to muck up your thread with unrelated stuff. Aln

[BobZilla]

Good too hear from you Aln,, I hope your doing well.

You know I am looking at all my parts and thinking,,,, hmm maybe build another one lol.

I have a bunch of coils from my previous machines and now an extra wheel. I have been kicking around the idea to make a 2 coiler with a smaller frame.