Re: three phase coiling/ alternator RCB

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

Original poster: Harvey Norris <harvich-at-yahoo-dot-com> 


--- Tesla list <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com> wrote:
 > Original poster: "Jim Lux" <jimlux-at-earthlink-dot-net>
 >
 > I've been running some interesting simulations, in
 > respect of having 3
 > basically identical (but slightly different) coils
 > running simultaneously,
 > near each other, to see if you could get triangular
 > or Wye sparks.
At one time I had three high induction coils that
normally exhibited a Q of ~8, these were placed as a
delta within a delta inside outer components of .15
henry, 12 ohms 14 gauge coil groups, that when 180
phased can supply an open circuit Q of 45 between the
coil systems. The 1000 ohm induction coils then supply
a q of 8 times that outside voltage range, which of
course slightly drops when placed between a
interphasal voltage range. So for this three phase set
up obtained from a 15 volt stator of a AC converted
car alternator source, generally a loaded high
induction coil inner phase will input 600 volts,
becoming 8 fold that value in its midpoint voltage
rise, (~4800 volts). Having three of these inner delta
series resonances, it is easy to light 20 inch neons
arranged either in delta of wye across the inner
voltage rises. But arranging a three phase arc gap
proved problematic, so that the arc once it had
assumed  itself across two voltage rise terminals,
would then prevent or somehow take up all the
available inner voltage rise, so that making a
coherent three phase arc gap proved impossible. Later
studies using a total of 13 simultaneous meter
readings involving
1) the stator voltage
2,3,4) - 3 stator line amperage readings
5,6,7) - Delta 3 phase amperage readings
8,9,10)- Delta 3 phase internal voltage rise readings
11,12,13) Inner Delta 3 phase interphasal voltage
readings

These readings containing 13 meters showed that the
phase angles were not being distributed properly so
that one phase was acting weakly, apparently due to
its lack of mutual induction with the other phases,
with respect to how the outer delta series resonances
are arranged. This in turn of course may have effected
the disfunction of the three phase arc gap, and the
importance of procuring a 13 meter reading is obvious,
where we then have two and not just one method to
determine the phase angles, both by comparing the
stator line delivery currents to the delta arms it
serves, and also the increase of interphasal voltage
readings as referenced to the outside voltages of the
phases themselves.

Before this time, the study of alternator source
frequency resonances has been relegated to myself, as
I dont exactly know anyone else doing this because of
the expense of the components. I have been at this for
about three years, and during this time replicated a
480 hz CW Tesla coil set up that uses multiturn
primaries and secondaries. Very amazing things have
been learned, and now it is time to say a significant
developement has occured on the drawing board, which
will significantly decrease the cost of resonant rise
schemes, so that now Tesla Coilers will now have a
special reason to attempt their own alternator 3 phase
schemes. Having procured a 3 phase high voltage
transformer, I will be able to test out this circuit
on a 3 phase TC primary and go from there. But the
foremost question that first needs to be adressed is
how much power can the alternator output? This will
tell us whether our project is even valid from the get
go... A medium voltage range stator is 14 volts, and
we can go up to 30 volts for short time periods to
power our TC. Lets see whats obtainable using 2 nf for
a TC primary. Remember 480 hz is 8 times the frequency
of 60 hz, also giving the capacity 8 times more energy
transfer, so a smaller capacity is equivalent to a
larger one at a lower frequency energy transfer wise.
If we input 14 volts into a 62 fold voltage rise made
by a 10 KVA pole pig, we can expect only 868 volts
secondary output. An open circuit reading of 14.6
volts stator  when shorted is reduced to 4.25 volts
enabling 8.5 Amps, thus Z(int) of the stator phase is
.5 ohm. The ohmic value of 2 nf -at- 480 hz would be X(C)
= 1/[2pi*480*000000002}= 165,870 ohms, thus demanding
a supply of 5.23 ma on the secondary-at- 868 volts with a
primary amperage demand of .324 A, a small quantity.
Now according to some electrical laws set forward In
HW Jackson's treatise on maximum power transfer, the
current found on the short should be twice the current
found at maximum power transfer, which also occurs as
a consequent 50% drop in the output voltage. So for
those laws, we can assume that the 14.6 stator voltage
should drop to half that value at 7.3 volts and then
enable only a conduction of 4 amps at maximum power
transfer, which is only a meager 29 watts! Luckily for
us however those laws dont seem to be valid in
procuring a single of three phases of the alternator,
and besides this later developements show
contradictions. And as I recall I have extracted 400
watts through three sets of 12 ohm resonances formerly
so I would set that as the top limit.

One should understand that to gain sensible operation
of the alternator, we need to resort to schemes
whereby amperage is extracted at the lowest possible
stator voltage, where 14.5 volts here is a midrange
voltage value. One might be surprised that if we turn
up the stator voltage to a 30 volt level, due to its
very inefficient delivery where stator saturation
factors start to act, the alternator will get hot even
with no loads attached! Internal circulation of stator
currents do occur as a loss factor. So here before us
the first TC obstacle is the lack of secondary voltage
from the transformer, and also the lack of primary
amperage demand with a 14 volt stator. Since
ferromagnetic voltage rise transformers in excess of
the pole pig 62.5/1 ratings are not a common item, and
because of the fact that our amperage demand at the
sensible 14 volt range is very small, these are
impossible sounding obstacles, but an option now has
appeared on the horizon.

This is a resonant current ballasting of a pole pig
primary using pairs of  Radio Shack Megacable Speaker
wire. For a sensible RCB, unfortunately we are lowered
to the inductance enabled by the length of wire having
the resistance identical to the impedance of the
source. We say unfortunately because the amount of
current limiting taking place may be in excess to what
our needs call for, in which case the unballasted
version is compared to. Thus here what I am
essentially saying is that drawing on a single phase,
we can construct a maximum power transfer circuit as
we understand it and by additionally resonating that
circuit by the inductance generated in the coil form
we can in fact create a voltage rise circuit
equivalent to the demand circuit in terms of the
sources current limited ability to deliver current.
Once we have constructed two of these circuits
inversely, by a three stator line connection where the
120 phasing is converted to 180 by mutual induction of
inductive components; the placement of a load across
the voltage rises is current limited to the amount of
reactance found in any of the components, which is an
entirely different value then when they are in
resonance when conduction near ohms law are
contemplated. The continual presence of the
interphased load, which is the resonant current
ballasted pole pig primary, insures that the circuit
never actually consumes its maximum amperage delivery
because of that load, and the next step therefore
becomes calculating the output voltage and amperage
demand of a 2 nf secondary cap. but meanwhile...

The results of this for a single 4 layer megacable
series, is that when the spirals are made bifilar
opposite windings, but currents enabling magnetic
fields in unity the currents found on the resonance
are actually 98% of the currents found on a short of
the circuit! Alternator RCB is the placement of two of
these outer delta series resonances of maximum power
transfer at resonance, across only two of the three
available delta three phase outputs. It is found that
by mutual inductance of 120 phased series resonances,
that their 120 phased action is easily converted to
180 at no losses of the newly derived stator voltages.
And therefore these coils then can act as bipolar
series resonances of maximum amperage demand on either
side of the pole pig primary, and the voltage rise
ratio of each of these 4 layer spirals can be
predicted as 6, for a 12 fold increase of input
voltage where 14 volts is then increased to 168 volts
input to pole pig primary, making 10,416 theoretical
volts available on secondary, which for 2 nf would
enable a current of 62.7 ma creating a demand of 3.89
A on primary. So the problem now becomes to see what
the RCB can supply at short, and this is estimated by
the impedance of 3 mh found on the 4 layer spiral...
This works out to 9 ohms -at- 480 hz, so a 14 volt stator
would be limited to 14/9 of 1.55 A current regulation
at 14 volts. One will need a supply of almost 4 amps
to enble a 2nf cap at these cited values, so the best
that could be hoped for is that for in this scenario
there seems to be a tradeoff involved in that using a
preliminary voltage rise circuit will simply not
function to provide that amount of voltage rise, if in
fact the supply cannot meet the demands, however it
seems the voltage rise circuit could still rise to the
amount of demand allowed for when the primary COULD
conduct at values near that limit. This would be a
mere 24 ma on secondary, or about a 4000 volt delivery
to a 2 nf cap. Actually then that isnt really that
bad, since for a 15,000 volt NST -at- 30 ma current
limitation, a 5.3 nf cap rating is its resonant value,
thus at 8 times the frequency and almost 1/3 the
voltage the energy transfer rates might be comparable.
And of course we can still amp out the field of the
alternator to get a 30 volt stator primary for short
duration 8000 volt secondary operations. But the
really unique thing this RCB setup gives is for the
possibility of effective quenching of an arc gap
however. This is because if we replace the pole pig
primary as a load to this circuit with a short, the
projections show that at this 14 volt stator, a
current of 1.5 A will be across the short, however
because that short converts two series resonances to a
single tank resonance, that 1.5A amperage circulation
would only allow .15A into the loop, given a forcasted
q of 10 and the increased impedance of the tank loop.
This means that if the secondary arc presents itself
as a short to the supply, the voltage across the
primary goes back down to its supply stator levels.
  I will try a alternator RCB of a 10 KVA tranformer
first with a 20 inch neon disharge and then with an
actual 2 nf  cap- primary and arc gap. In these
situations it is clearly advantageous to use RCB,
since it nominally acts as a voltage rise component to
an infinite load, but at the same time can act as a
load within the confines of a tank circuit at maximum
amperage demand. To clarify the difference here a
simple reactive ballasting only reduces the possible
amperage delivery to the primary of the transformer,
and that limit is set by the ohmic resistance of the
limiting factor. In this case there are situations
where a unballasted primary will allow more current to
be assumed then would be consumed by its regulated
counterpart. This is of course only common sense,
without the current limiting factor in series, there
is no current limitation. Thus again we say that the
unballasted version can contain more amperage then the
ballasted. In contrast the RCB regulation instead will
allow a HIGHER amperage input to occur on account of
its ballasting; then what the unregulated version will
allow for, and it does this on account that it also
functions as a voltage rise component in the
situations where the supply apparently exceeds the
demand of the secondary. However a distinction is made
then for the unballasted version, a secondary short
then would mean more current in that comparison,
however the RCB will see such a short as a high
impedance load change to the stator inputs. In
contrast a short of the secondary  tranformer of an
ordinary primary ballast scheme will give its maximum
conduction values on the primary, but on the RCB the
stator demand does not see those low impedance values
at a short, but rather Q times the tank circuit Q's as
a difference between amperage demand conditions
between open and close positions of midpoint amperage
conductions.
Sincerely HDN



=====
Tesla Research Group; Pioneering the Applications of Interphasal Resonances 
http://groups.yahoo-dot-com/group/teslafy/