Re: three phase power (of the resonant kind)

["Tesla list" <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>]

Original poster: "harvey norris by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-uswest-dot-net>" <harvich-at-yahoo-dot-com>


--- Tesla list <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com> wrote:
> Original poster: "by way of Terry Fritz
> <twftesla-at-uswest-dot-net>" <Mddeming-at-aol-dot-com>
> Hi All, 
> 
>      I appreciate the clean, clear experimental
> descriptions in much of the 
> list which allow peer review, replication of
> results, and corroboration. I 
> also se how easy it might be to slide into the New
> Age Twilight Zone of 
> Tesla-worshippers who take his every musing as
> revealed divine truth, to be 
> rediscovered by the faithful, now that he has "gone
> to a higher 
> resonance".;-)) 
> 
> I have read, read, and re-read Harvey Norris'
> 2847-word manifesto on 
> polyphase coils, UFO's, and the Hutchison Effect,
> including all links to 
> other references. The term 3-phase Bipolar still
> seems oxymoronic to me, but 
> parts of it are lucid. Based on the long run-on,
> redundant, semi-connected 
> structure of the presentation itself, I am inclined
> to view the paper as more 
> of a bipolar phenomenon (per DSM-IV). 

The two trinity web pages I have made are only a case
of making a resonant three phase transformer, in
contrast to the normal ferromagnetic method. See
http://msnhomepages.talkcity-dot-com/LaGrangeLn/teslafy/trin3.html
Others can do the same thing without using massive L
components as I have done by simply using a higher
input frequency, or spinning the alternator faster. I
have outlined the differences  between ferromagnetic
and resonant transformers below. The resonant voltage
rises were done in delta sections, each voltage rise
made further by more LC resonances placed as another
delta inside the former delta from the midpoints of
the former triangle. Since I have made a schematic for
this, there is no mystery, only straightforward series
resonant rise of voltage where the L quantities are
given the proper C values to resonate to the input
frequency. The first stage was successful to take a 19
volt input from the alternator and light 15 watt
florescents. The second stage was successful to then
light neons. The third stage was unsuccessful to
display much arcing, but did provide a smaller voltage
rise. This is something that will be returned to as
nothing has actually been tuned, and the third stage
was a very haphazard effort where the coils should
have been placed on top of the stage two resonance,
but were instead wired to another room because of
winter conditions in the garage. But since I am only
inputing 60 watts max to begin with (having not yet
added a step up transformer), I didnt really expect
much from stage 3 to begin with. 

    Sorry for all the pasted ramblings, but when I am
wrong I will admit so. I agree that the Hutchison
material borders on psuedo science. Just for the
record here is what I am saying. Anytime you run a
short between two 180 phased series resonances, across
the circuits midpoints, that changes the circuit into
one figure 8 tank circuit of 4 times more internal
resistance, then that contained in the dual 180 phased
series resonances in parallel. This can be shown by
anyone assembling an series resonant dual opposing
parallel LC circuit from a signal generator, since 60
hz resonant circuits are themselves costly to build.
When this method was tried with very large induction
coils, it was found that an arc gap along this short
midpath would be very self quenching, producing good
high frequency effects from its air core construction.
I have also tried this method with a large amperage
system in 60 hz resonance of 15 [14 gauge coils of 500
ft on each side in series], where the arc gap did not
perform satisfactorily consisting of merely large
staccato pops(Lower voltage at arc gap, attempting to
regulate a 12 amp consumption) But the actual short
shows the same condition, it changes the two series
resonances into one parallel resonance. I have
suggested that this method might also be employed by a
set of dual tesla primaries. I am now trying a mini
version of this idea using the Radio Shack dual mega
speaker cable as the coiled spiral primaries. The
advantage to this method is that the combined
primaries mutual inductance is almost 4 times that of
one primary. The reason for this can be found in
teslas "Coil for Electromagnets" where I have
discussed why I consider some analysis and even the
claims made on the patent itself as qualifying as a
myth. This and the patent link can be found at my
messageboard under Myth of Tesla Patent 512,340.
     To continue here to the three phase application,
a simple thought occured. If the three phases were
loaded by three series resonances, would not running a
short wire between the midpoints of those series
resonances do the same thing? So this was tested and
the answer is yes with some complications, involving
the fact that I did not procure a 4th return wire when
the alternator conversion was made. That leaves only 3
120 phased voltage terminals. The confusion concerning
delta and wye connections to the three loads is made
by simple facts of how can you hook 3 loads up? There
are only two ways to do it. Connecting one end of the
series resonances(made in ordered directions) to each
of the terminals only leaves two options. Either you
connect the other end to the adjacent phase for a
delta connection or you hook all 3 ends in common,
making it a wye connection. Now I have scoured some
textbooks to find references for what I am talking
about, but have found none. The textbooks state that
either delta or wye connections are made, but they do
not indicate that if they are series resonant loads,
that shorting the midpoints will then make them into 3
tank circuits. But it is also very much common sense
when this schematic is looked at, that the series
resonances can be reinterpreted as  3 tank circuits
attached in wye,WITH all the connections on the wye
being shared with another phase as a common loop
connection.. In any case that circuit offers an
outside path of series resonances, and a inside path
of tank circiuts where the shared amperages amount to
1.73 of the total tank circuit.where the wye bisects
the three delta seires resonances. If resistive loads
are placed on the interior wye, the device acts as a
resonant transformer. Im sure folks have heard of
delta/wye conversions where one schematic can be
transposed to another, and new ohmic values assigned
to the resistors in order for those circuits to be
deemed identical in amperage consumptions. But that is
NOT what I am referring to. What I am referring to is
the fact that if 3 series resonances are powered in 3
phase delta, then schematically changing them into
three tank circuits will involve the insertion or
transposition of the circuit made by a wye connected
across the S.R. delta midpoints. Likewise(but
untested) would be the fact that if the series
resonances were arranged in WYE, then the insertion of
a delta short path across those midpoints should
create three tank circuits. I doubt if anyone can
disproove these facts.

Do I employ much speculation? Yes I do for the
interest of discovery. If I had not speculated to
begin with I would have never made the AC alternator
conversion and went to proove something deemed
impossible by some. Why is it deemed impossible?
Because it seems to defy electrical common sense at
first glance. The outside delta quantities that
consume an amperage dictated to be close to their ohms
law conduction values consist of one current path that
would be deemed the predominant one. The other current
path made by the  interior insertion of a wye at
series resonant midpoints should only represent
another alternative current path, whose ratio of q
squared less amperage consumption in tank condition
would be assumed to only be a portion of total
amperage consumption, as if we were to typically treat
this as another branch in parallel. Since its
impedance on that interior branch is vastly greater
than the  impedance lacking resistive currents on the
outer branchways, by ordinary DC law (analogy) that
outer branchway will always contain the predominant
amperage. But of course we are not dealing with DC
laws but laws of AC resonance. In AC resonance the
path of highest impedance is taken in preferance to
that of one of lower impedance,where these appear to
be possible as parallel pathways in the circuit: {This
is what happens in the wye inserted DSR's, two
possible pathways are made}something construed to be
in semi conflict with ordinary DC current path laws.
Depending how you look at it,this actually happens
when you short one element in a LC series resonance,
the new preferred pathway is of higher impedance. 
Taking two LC series resonances 180 out of phase and
in parallel, and further supplying a path between
their midpoints is equivalent to now supplying a new
path of even higher impedance, an amount q squared
greater than the original impedance conditions. Thus
it takes the path of highest impedance, in that case
changing two separate series resonances, thereby
diverting their resonant rises of voltage to resonant
rises of amperage combined into one parallel resonant
circuit with twice the recorded amperage(or 1.73 in 
midpoint/wye 3 phase pathways)than on the sides or
individual elements alone. Knowing this can lead to
the construction of catastrophic resonant
circuits,(that must be input fused)   I could easily
construct such a circuit by placing the 19 volts from
the 3 phase alternator to my 3 phase 10/1 step up
transformer, making a 190 volt input across 12.6 ohms
per phase,those phases consisting of 10 14 gauge coils
to the delta series resonances. If the inside wye load
becomes disabled, the outside delta windings will go
towards insulation meltdown, or in this case attempt
to conduct 190/12=15.8 Amps, something the alternator
probably might not supply at the small input rpm.  So
what I have supplied here is an  example of a
(approximately) purely resonant 3 phase AC
transformer, where voltage transformation is normally
something ordinarily made with ferromagnetic means of
a 3phase step up transformer using silicone steel, but
this transformer is substantially different in
operation as it is inverted to common operation... The
(ordinary) transformer can operate with the outside
load connections open or empty and consume minimal
reactive power. The resonant transformer is exactly
the opposite, in that it consumes maximum power with
no load connections, and for some load applications
such as electrolysis,it is surely necessary to make
the voltage input placed to this higher catastrophic
value, which only occurs if infinite resistance is
seen in the interior wye pathways. Also substantially
different in operation is a sort of floating voltage
potential that the output load will see(or apply). A
load of comparatively small resistance will see a
minimal voltage, and a larger resistance a larger
voltage. Thus these transformers then accomplish the
similar action of a current limited secondary of a NST
transformer, that will only supply so much rated
current and can be safely shorted on the secondary. An
ordinarily transformer becomes the catastophic version
if we short its secondary and cause meltdown, it
consumes maximum amperage, whereas the resonant
transformer consumes its minimal amount of amperage
under shorted output condition. Of particular interest
is the application towards the input voltages to a 
many celled electrolysisor derived from the resonant
transformer input. The cells arranged in series
compared to the cells arranged in parallel will offer
the same values of voltage across the cells in both
methods with a resonant transformer, whereas a
ferromagnetic transformer will offer different values
when this is done. The voltage the resonant
transformer always gives is the thermoneutral voltage
value for most efficient electrolysis. This eliminates
the problerm found in the ferromagnetic method of
making a certain number of cells in series to meet the
correct voltage requirement, thus eliminating
substantial costings of the electrolysis cell design.
    Having gone off topic let me only suggest that if
someone were to attempt to drive three identical tesla
coils from a three phase source, having three arc gaps
seems to be redundant as one should serve to be
sufficient, in the same way that the primaries of a
binary resonant tesla coil(soon to be built and
tested!) have two primaries each sharing the same arc
gap from opposite polarity directions.
Sincerely Harvey D Norris

=====
Binary Resonant System  http://members3.boardhost-dot-com/teslafy/

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - Buy the things you want at great prices. 
http://auctions.yahoo-dot-com/