My system for charging a capacitor is simple. If I need 100 volts I put several caps in series in massive over-voltage! SO I'll put 2,000 volts worth in series together.
Then I take advantage of the charging curve. Funny thing is, some of the caps go negative.
@Aking.21
All that is doing is spreading the checkmate out over more capacitors.
I had prepared a post for @Magluvin at OU on the Energy Amplification thread, but will post it here. Maybe refer him here as well. I think this could be a major advancement but it will require some practice before it can be perfected.
The adiabatic design is just another checkmate condition, except that at least they are realizing that in order to advance in a certain line of experimentation, you need to start developing what I had coined as an "OU exclusion list". I had been eluding to this on an off for years, make a list of things that don't work and stay away from those conditions for 30-60 days but it's good to see this in a formal theory, although it is still a checkmate theory as it is proposed.
The thing is we live in a preset world with preset requirements. Our bulbs work off of 120/240vac mains and produce good luminosity. If we take a 12vdc bulb we require less volts but much more amps so we step the voltage down and increase the amps, rectify and we get this great luminosity as well. The problem is in all instances we consume the energy at the end of the game when the transformation is already complete. This is where we all know we are going wrong since when the stress of the load is applied the source starts backing up and losses occur due to the standard metrics we already know and accept as the main villains.
You see this is a problem that many in OU have never been able to understand, not even the best EEers here have ever tackled this question (as far as I have seen thus far) with some level of logic. It is a great challenge. Yes Tesla did high voltage but what did he use it for? If you cannot use it, you ar eleft to produce impressive lightning or sparks otherwise what's the use?
Think of the problem like a hot dog making machine or a hot dog extruder. The extruder is sending out the hot dog paste at 5 feet per second but the hot dogs need to be 6 inches long to fit inside the box. So what do they do? Yup, they put an adjustable cutter at the exit of the extrusion timed at 10 cuts per second and every second, they can fill one box with 10 hot dogs. Good business. This simple solution is not used in OU/EE, why I don't know.
So let's say you have a very efficient device, it consumes very little power but dammit it outputs 50kv when it reaches its operating frequency of 60Hz.
We will usually take that 50kv, dump it integrally into a HV capacitor (or just spark it Tesla Toroid style) then work to discharge fast enough to cut it up in usable pieces. This we do every day and each time, when that voltage reaches 50Kv (or any other highest voltage) it creates a backwards pressure on the output and that's when you start creating heat, flyback, back emf or whatever you can call it. Add that to the perils of switching 50kv and you realize this is not a good solution. Not a good solution because the reality will always be that if a primary is driven to a point where the secondary produces more output, the secondary automatically will become the primary and it will want to kill the dipole. This we cannot get away from as we drive our coils today.
So let's say you need 200 volts for the output. If you could scope the 50kv rise, every second you will see 60 rise and peaks of 50kv each. But if you could divert each rise 250 times per 1Hz, or, at 15khz per 60Hz, the output should not exceed 200 volts regardless of how high the actual output can rise in volts and the amps should increase proportionally as well.
So a simple hot dog extruder does exactly the job. Of course if the cutter breaks, then you will be in trouble but the EE solution could be a 250v safety zener of proper amps rating to dump any excess or at worst a spark gap if there is a full run away condition.
The experience and ability in EE required to do this goes way above my head man. Anyone would need to be very well versed to even consider it but the payoff could be so great. Even starting with a simple lower output tv flyback transformer would be a good start. The 15kHz mosfet base signal could come from any audio source so imagine an audio driver to control the HV reduced output frequency. The output load would receive 60hz with 15kHz hash.
Actually we do this in reverse when we pulse our coil. So eventually if the two could be combined together, one efficient design primary and one efficient design secondary recovery. By not letting the secondary HV rise, you are promoting a freer primary performance, were the primary amperage would not be lost in the secondary rise. hahaha
Hmmmmm. I think I just described a TK device. Naaaaaaaaaaaaa. Hmmmmmmmm.
Also @GK had been saying that SM used his stun gun circuit. Why not. Just don't let the voltage rise to the stun level, keep unloading it to a load as it rises.
So where it would definitely be good to look and practice is taking the HV from any regular flyback transformation and cutting it up and sending it directly to a load before it can rise to its peak voltage. This will keep the primary at it leanest operating parameters since it will never see a full rise on the secondary. So circuits where you can place a mosfet on the HV line, mosfet rated at 250 or 300 volts throughput run at 200 volts should keep it cool, or if you ever found a good diode with a 200 volt forward voltage cracking level would do it as well but it shorter bursts (mosfet is better).
You need to produce high voltage but not let it rise to its maximum high voltage. The layering this produces will be consumed by the load right away. The trick is to always start the HV output mosfet pulsing before you start the primary pulsing.
wattsup
PS: As usual sorry for long post.
Author
Topic: Ultra-efficiency through adiabatic design (Read 15444 times)
