John, I expect the lack of response is due to the difficulty of and
enormous time consumed by explaining and resolving these kinds of
issues, especially without quantification. This difficult in
generating interest is compounded by the negative inventor syndrome
attitude you seem to emote in your post, as well as the lack of any
signs of current efforts at experimenting. I have taken the time
to dig up and post some old notes I have on one of many experiments
I've done along similar lines. It took a lot of time to do this, so
I want to avoid spending much more time on this.
What it all boils down to for transformers is the amount of *mutual*
coil coupling. The inductance and flux of the independent primary
and secondary coils is immaterial to the power coupling, and the wide
range of possibilities for those values vs the mutual coupling value
makes for a very confusing situation. The mutual coupling is
symmetric, it works for power transmission equally both ways,
primary to secondary, and vice versa, as well as in generating the
energy conserving back emf. This complexity is further complicated
by the fact that the only perfect toroidal coil is powered by a
perfect current sheet (impossible) and has an infinitely large major
radius (also impossible). I have examined the field around toroidal
transformers using an open gate FET, and the fringe E fields and thus
changing fringe B fields are detectably there, but small in
comparison to inside the torus.
I have sent the notes along to vortex in a separate thread "Odd
Transformer Notes". I still have the Odd Transformer, so may post
pictures of it on my web site. I'll send a URL if I do.
On Feb 19, 2008, at 5:38 PM, John Berry wrote:
I have found that diameter of longer coils has little effect on gauss.
Never the less this paradox would seemingly still hold as long as
the coils were short, preferablr shorter than shown.
On 2/20/08, John Berry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I have designed a transformer which I have every reason to believe
should be very much overunity. (the primary should not 'see' the
secondary)
But this post isn't about that because from my previous experience
on vortex if I am not ignored outright I will get one of 2 answers,
either 'It won't work but I don't know why' or I'll get some
equasion which I warned in the first place I will think looks like
some alien language and not understand.
No, this is about a brain twisting magnetic anomoly I came across
while pondering a possible version of the transformer.
The basis of the problem is this.
Common sense and coil calculators (and even real world experiuments
I did looooong ago) all assure me that 2 identical hoop coils where
the only difference is the diameter should produce very different
magnetic field strengths (densities) when an identical current is
passed.
The tighter coil produces a higher gauss than the same number of
Ampere turns in a larger dia. coil.
The next fact that can't be denied is that a coil wound on a highly
magnetically permeable toroid should have no significant readily
measurible magnetic flux outside the toroid provided the core has
not been saturated. (I am well aware that infact strong magnetic
fields do exist outside the toroid but due to superposition they
are not readily detected by magnetic means)
These 2 facts collide in a seeming impossibility however, if you
have (to keep it easy) 2 square toroid forms (a normal E I bar
transformer with the middle of the E removed) and you wind a single
layer coil of say 100 turns on (the outside vertical leg of) each
of these toroid forms and pass a current through there should not
be an observible external magnetic field from either of these
toroids. see fig 1.
If we now place the 2 coils next to each other (as in fig 2) we
should not expect any drop in the gauss in either core since
neither produced a net external magnetic field.
Now consider fig 3, we have a show down (largest gauss wins)
between a tight coil over one core or a larger looser coil (of the
same number of ampere turns) over 2 cores, the tighter coil should
win, easy right?
Now in fig 4 we have the same only we have another core we have
placed next to the tight coil, which one wins now?
Since we have alrewady established that the tight cores shouldn't
interfere with each other the 2 tight cores should win.
But by now surely you can see the paradox, the only difference
between the 2 tight coils and the one loose one is the windings
between the 2 tight coiled cores, but these shouldn't create any
net magnetic field, fig 5 helps illistrate this issue.
Anyone wanna take a crack at this, either explaining the paradox or
at least telling me in each case if you agree with the winner I've
chosen.
Or run it through a 3D magnetic simulation program?
Or at least agree it's a head scratcher!?!?
Horace Heffner
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
