PopularFX
Home Help Search Login Register
Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.
OverUnity Research > Benches > AlienGrey > Dally, Shark & Ruslan workbench
2024-11-26, 08:57:17
News: Registration with the OUR forum is by admin approval.

Pages: 1 ... 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 [45] 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 ... 101
Author Topic: Dally, Shark & Ruslan workbench  (Read 310149 times)
Topic Options img
img  Itsu
Re: Dally, Shark & Ruslan workbench « Reply #1100 on: 2021-06-22, 14:57:48 »

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 4159
Quote from: picowatt on 2021-06-22, 14:21:52
Itsu,

I am not sure I understand the purpose of this test, but it does not look like the GDT is "too slow".

Note in the waveforms that  after the GDT fires, all oscillations are quenched.  On the next TC pulse, oscillations begin to build again, but do not reach sufficient voltage to fire the GDT.  At the second TC pulse period, oscillations are still decaying from the prior TC pulse providing more signal to the Q6 base and driving the oscillations to a higher voltage sufficient to fire the GDT.

What is of interest is the large spikes on the base waveform as the GDT fires.  Perhaps these spikes are moreso test lead induced or ground related artifacts than representative of the real base voltage.  However, if these spikes are indeed occurring to a large degree on the base of Q6, they are putting Q6 at risk of damage.

Additionally, there are lesser spikes seen at the end of the TC pulses where the GDT is not firing.  I had believed these spikes to be only related to Q6 turn off.  However, these spikes do appear to be aligned with the peak in voltage of the oscillations (which may also be coincidental with Q6 turn-off).

Is it possible you have some leakage occurring (capacitor breakdown, brush/corona discharge, etc) somewhere even at the lower voltage oscillations (which must be lower than the 350V of the GDT)?

PW

PW,

glad you did respond to this as it basically confirms what my 2nd thoughts were about this skipping because it did not reach the firing point of that specific GDT.

The idea is to limit the oscillations/ringing so that only a few (5 or so) sharp HV pulses are present on the antenna, disrupting the push pull signal on the Grenade/inductor like shown in the video screenshot in Vasik his post #1055.

If i understand that video / text correct he uses a sparkgap at the antenna's end to ground to get this result.
My thoughts where to use GDT's as they come on severall value's like i have them in 250, 350 and 1000V to have more control.
1000V did not work (fire) in my case yet, so a used a 350V one, but i can try a 250V.

Where those base spikes come from i was wondering myself, as basically the fired GDT conducts the HV from the antenna to ground, so it should be gone.
But i notice that the OWON scope is more sensitive for uncontrolled jumping menu's etc. when having a GDT attached and firing then without.

If there is some leakage occurring (capacitor breakdown, brush/corona discharge, etc) i don't think so as there is nothing attached to the kacher secondary top or antenna which could break down or jump the 0.3mm gap.

Itsu
   
img  picowatt
Re: Dally, Shark & Ruslan workbench « Reply #1101 on: 2021-06-22, 15:31:35 »
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 453
Food for thought with regard to the collector voltage waveforms:

During the Q6 on period, the first few cycles of oscillations appear fairly clean and sinusoidal.  However, as those oscillations build, we begin to see higher frequency spikes impressed on the collector voltage.

Two things are occurring during that spike laden portion of the collector waveform.

First, because the amplitude of the oscillations are increasing at that point, so too is the amplitude of the feedback from the "antenna" (I dislike having to use "antenna").  Because of this, the base of Q6 is being driven negative toward Q6 turnoff at the peak of the collector voltage oscillations.  It is possible the spikes observed on the collector voltage waveform are due to Q6 rapidly oscillating between turn on and turn off as it hovers near complete turn off. 

Second, it appears that the signal observed on a probe placed nearby the TC coil indicates that the peak voltage in the coil is achieved during the spike laden portion of the collector waveform.  Stated otherwise, the spike laden portion of the Q6 collector voltage waveform appears to coincide with the TC coil's maximum output voltage point.  As discussed in a prior post regarding the GDT experiment, is it possible we are observing corona discharge or insulation breakdown somewhere in the circuit that is producing the collector voltage spikes at the TC output voltage peaks?  The GDT was only firing when voltage exceeded 350 volts, so we know that every other waveform in that test was not achieving that voltage.  Yet even at those lower peak voltages (less than 350 volts) the spikes on the collector waveform were observed.  One would be forgiven for dismissing the possibility of corona discharge or insulation breakdown at such a low voltage (ie, less than 350 volts), however, this circuit is oscillating at over 1 megacycle, and at those frequencies, voltage wants to leak wherever it can.

As stated, food for thought...

PW

 
   
img  picowatt
Re: Dally, Shark & Ruslan workbench « Reply #1102 on: 2021-06-22, 15:38:05 »
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 453
Quote from: Itsu on 2021-06-22, 14:57:48
PW,

glad you did respond to this as it basically confirms what my 2nd thoughts were about this skipping because it did not reach the firing point of that specific GDT.

The idea is to limit the oscillations/ringing so that only a few (5 or so) sharp HV pulses are present on the antenna, disrupting the push pull signal on the Grenade/inductor like shown in the video screenshot in Vasik his post #1055.

If i understand that video / text correct he uses a sparkgap at the antenna's end to ground to get this result.
My thoughts where to use GDT's as they come on severall value's like i have them in 250, 350 and 1000V to have more control.
1000V did not work (fire) in my case yet, so a used a 350V one, but i can try a 250V.

Where those base spikes come from i was wondering myself, as basically the fired GDT conducts the HV from the antenna to ground, so it should be gone.
But i notice that the OWON scope is more sensitive for uncontrolled jumping menu's etc. when having a GDT attached and firing then without.

If there is some leakage occurring (capacitor breakdown, brush/corona discharge, etc) i don't think so as there is nothing attached to the kacher secondary top or antenna which could break down or jump the 0.3mm gap.

Itsu

Is the "antenna" actually the secondary of a Tesla coil, with the low voltage end of that secondary connected to the Q6 base via J2 ?  (or am I still completely in the dark as to how all this is interconnected?)

I can't keep track of all these windings...

Where is this 0.3mm gap you mentioned?

Also, as one end of the "antenna" is discharged (SG or GDT), does not the discharge current flowing return through J2 and Q6 base?

PW
   
img  verpies
Re: Dally, Shark & Ruslan workbench « Reply #1103 on: 2021-06-22, 15:43:25 »

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3498
Quote from: picowatt on 2021-06-22, 14:46:00
...it would seem reasonable to expect to see at least some semblance of similarly noisey/spikey signals in the antenna current waveform.
Indeed.  The current probe is good to 60MHz so it should not low-pass filter the current signal.
It is difficult to know what is real without a shielded floating differential scope measurement.
   
img  picowatt
Re: Dally, Shark & Ruslan workbench « Reply #1104 on: 2021-06-22, 16:15:02 »
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 453
Itsu,

If I understand what is supposed to happen, a few HV pulses at the TC frequency are supposed to jump a spark to excite/interrupt the piush pull driven coil during the TC pulse period (I await any correction on that assumption).  If so, replacing the spark gap with GDT's may not be advisable.  Once the GDT ionizes, it is basically a dead short with a fairly low holding voltage (ie, a large hysteresis).  There will also be some amount of deionizing/turn off time that may be slower than the TC oscillation frequency period allowing the GDT to remain ionized (on) during subsequent swings of the TC oscillations.

A spark gap also has some degree of off time hysteresis, but I would think that it would have a faster turn off time than the GDT, and with proper gap adjustment and applied voltage, could be fast enough to "spark" and then quench on individual and subsequent HV pulses.

I looked at post 1055's waveforms.  It seems the more I grasp what is supposed to happen in this system, the less I understand as to how or why it is supposed to self-run.

As well, having briefly looked at the tuning pdf, I'd be in fear for my test equipment if I am supposed to see sparks dancing off metal surfaces...

PW     
   
img  Itsu
Re: Dally, Shark & Ruslan workbench « Reply #1105 on: 2021-06-22, 16:29:57 »

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 4159
Quote from: picowatt on 2021-06-22, 15:38:05
Is the "antenna" actually the secondary of a Tesla coil, with the low voltage end of that secondary connected to the Q6 base via J2 ?  (or am I still completely in the dark as to how all this is interconnected?)

I can't keep track of all these windings...

Where is this 0.3mm gap you mentioned?

Also, as one end of the "antenna" is discharged (SG or GDT), does not the discharge current flowing return through J2 and Q6 base?

PW

Please see diagram below,  in blue some comments.

So the kacher secondary and the antenna are connected at the secondaries top end (via a ferrite transformer not showed here).

The GDT i placed at the antenna (top) end to ground, so not through J2 or Q6

The 0.3mm gap i mentioned was the space a 350V spike needs to jump through air to ground, but there is no such 0.3mm gap from the secondary or antenna to ground normally.

Itsu 
   
img  NickZ
Re: Dally, Shark & Ruslan workbench « Reply #1106 on: 2021-06-22, 16:39:09 »
Group: Guest
   PW:
   Yes, it gets a bit scary to see sparks and streamer jumping all around, and grounding out to metal surfaces. ,And even though there is also the radiating HV from the Kacher signal on most all of the push/pull components. That is why it's important to not go to high with the Kacher output voltages. Too high, meaning like 1 centimeter streamers at around 10.000 volts. They will fry the sensitive low voltage components, anywhere nearby.

   Below is an image of how the Kacher's primary, secondary (blue smaller coil), and the antenna coils at the end (bigger blue coil), are shown on the upper picture, are all supposed to be wound.
 
   But, what I don't get is, if the signal from the push/pull TL494 is ALSO being used to turn on the Kacher's base circuit,. Why does the scope shot that Vasik and I have posted (below) of the Push/pull and Kacher signals, show the push/pull running at one frequency like 14.6KHz, and the Kacher's output being a different frequency like 1.6MHz, or so. Should they not both be running at the SAME frequency? But, they aren't.
Perhaps Vasik can explain that, as it not clear to me. And no it's not clear from the schematic either, as compared to the actual results.
  Sorry for the blurry scope shot, but the scope readings are as I've mentioned above.

    NickZ
   
img  Itsu
Re: Dally, Shark & Ruslan workbench « Reply #1107 on: 2021-06-22, 16:39:26 »

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 4159
Quote from: picowatt on 2021-06-22, 16:15:02
Itsu,

If I understand what is supposed to happen, a few HV pulses at the TC frequency are supposed to jump a spark to excite/interrupt the piush pull driven coil during the TC pulse period (I await any correction on that assumption).  If so, replacing the spark gap with GDT's may not be advisable.  Once the GDT ionizes, it is basically a dead short with a fairly low holding voltage (ie, a large hysteresis).  There will also be some amount of deionizing/turn off time that may be slower than the TC oscillation frequency period allowing the GDT to remain ionized (on) during subsequent swings of the TC oscillations.

A spark gap also has some degree of off time hysteresis, but I would think that it would have a faster turn off time than the GDT, and with proper gap adjustment and applied voltage, could be fast enough to "spark" and then quench on individual and subsequent HV pulses.

I looked at post 1055's waveforms.  It seems the more I grasp what is supposed to happen in this system, the less I understand as to how or why it is supposed to self-run.

As well, having briefly looked at the tuning pdf, I'd be in fear for my test equipment if I am supposed to see sparks dancing off metal surfaces...

PW   

What is supposed to happen is to get the same signals as shown in Vasik his post #1055.

I have seen creating this cutoff HV Kacher burst via a spark gap, but some also say it can be done without a spark gap.
So i tried to mimic this cutoff HV Kacher burst via a GDT and it seems to work partly.

But there should be a HF burst of sharp pulses to disrupt the push pull signal, thats how i understand it should work.

Concerning the fear for test equipment, yes thats my greatest concern also as i have had some damage already.

 Itsu
   
img  picowatt
Re: Dally, Shark & Ruslan workbench « Reply #1108 on: 2021-06-22, 16:40:25 »
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 453
Quote from: Itsu on 2021-06-22, 16:29:57
Please see diagram below,  in blue some comments.

So the kacher secondary and the antenna are connected at the secondaries top end (via a ferrite transformer not showed here).

The GDT i placed at the antenna (top) end to ground, so not through J2 or Q6

The 0.3mm gap i mentioned was the space a 350V spike needs to jump through air to ground, but there is no such 0.3mm gap from the secondary or antenna to ground normally.

Itsu

Itsu,

That diagram makes the "Kacher" look a lot like a Tesla coil.  So, is the Kacher driver actually a gated Tesla coil driver, which drives (via Q6 collector) the primary of the Tesla coil with the low voltage end of the Tesla coil secondary connected to the base of Q6 via J2?  Is the ferrite rod gizmo between the bottom/LV end of the TC secondary and the J2 connection?

If all of the above is correct, where are these 4 or 5 HV pulses derived from the TC supposed to be injected/interrupt the push pull coil?

PW

   
img  picowatt
Re: Dally, Shark & Ruslan workbench « Reply #1109 on: 2021-06-22, 16:44:11 »
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 453
Quote from: Itsu on 2021-06-22, 16:39:26
What is supposed to happen is to get the same signals as shown in Vasik his post #1055.

I have seen creating this cutoff HV Kacher burst via a spark gap, but some also say it can be done without a spark gap.
So i tried to mimic this cutoff HV Kacher burst via a GDT and it seems to work partly.

But there should be a HF burst of sharp pulses to disrupt the push pull signal, thats how i understand it should work.

Concerning the fear for test equipment, yes thats my greatest concern also as i have had some damage already.

 Itsu

Itsu,

I looked at #1055 and I really don't see what I would call a "disruption" of the push pull signal.  I see a few oscillations at the TC frequency impressed on the push pull at its waveform peaks, but I would not call that a "disruption".

PW
   
img  picowatt
Re: Dally, Shark & Ruslan workbench « Reply #1110 on: 2021-06-22, 16:57:59 »
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 453
Quote from: NickZ on 2021-06-22, 16:39:09
   PW:
   Yes, it gets a bit scary to see sparks and streamer jumping all around, and grounding out to metal surfaces. ,And even though there is also the radiating HV from the Kacher signal on most all of the push/pull components. That is why it's important to not go to high with the Kacher output voltages. Too high, meaning like 1 centimeter streamers at around 10.000 volts. They will fry the sensitive low voltage components, anywhere nearby.

   Below is an image of how the Kacher's primary, secondary (blue smaller coil), and the antenna coils at the end (bigger blue coil), are shown on the upper picture, are all supposed to be wound.
 
   But, what I don't get is, if the signal from the push/pull TL494 is ALSO being used to turn on the Kacher's base circuit,. Why does the scope shot that Vasik and I have posted (below) of the Push/pull and Kacher signals, show the push/pull running at one frequency like 16KHz,  and the Kacher's output being a different frequency like 1.6MHz, or so. Should they not both be running at the SAME frequency? But, they aren't.

    NickZ

NickZ,

Your picture of the various coils only confuses me further.  I'm starting to feel like a deer in the headlights...

Regarding the PP frequency versus the TC oscillation frequency, the PP frequency (from the 494) is being used to gate the oscillator (Q6) that drives the TC/Kacher (via delay adjust RV6 and pulse width adjust RV7) .  The TC is oscillating/ringing at its LC resonant frequency (>1Mc) but the driving circuit (Q6) is being gated on and off at the push pull frequency.

PW
   
img  picowatt
Re: Dally, Shark & Ruslan workbench « Reply #1111 on: 2021-06-22, 17:07:59 »
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 453
Itsu,

Regarding any inadvertent discharges from the TC during LV operation (ie, 12 volt operation), I'd be tempted to prepare to operate the circuit at 12-24 volts in the dark (no test equipment, no lights, just the required supplies made easy to turn on and off in the dark.  Cover any light sources on the supplies).  Allow your eyes to become dark adjusted for at least 20 minutes and then fire up the system and look for any corona discharges.

An ultrasonic leak detector or bat detector (heterodyne type) is usually very sensitive at detecting corona/brush discharges from moderate (safe) distances.  Additional shielding of such a device may be required in the electrically noisey environment surrounding this system.

PW   
   
img  NickZ
Re: Dally, Shark & Ruslan workbench « Reply #1112 on: 2021-06-22, 17:22:17 »
Group: Guest
    PW:
   Yes, I agree, concerning the "interuption" from the Kacher circuit not really showing up as an actual interuption. Perhaps it's the best way to try to explain its workings. As that is not your normal way of doing things, up to now.

  Your explanation is what I had figured out also, about the two different running frequencies. Thanks for the reply confirming my question.

   Normally there is no spark gap on this device. At least not on the original schematics shown by Akula, nor Ruslan. Nor have I heard of the antenna signal being used for the purpose of something other than to pulse the push pull inductor/grenade coils, as in the way that Verpies has mentioned.
   Sorry for the confusion with the Kacher coils image that I posted, but, it is the same as I am using. And, yes, there are a lot of things that are very confusing, until we can get to see them in action.

   NickZ
   
img  picowatt
Re: Dally, Shark & Ruslan workbench « Reply #1113 on: 2021-06-22, 17:45:07 »
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 453
Quote from: NickZ on 2021-06-22, 17:22:17
    PW:
   Yes, I agree, concerning the "interuption" from the Kacher circuit not really showing up as an actual interuption. Perhaps it's the best way to try to explain its workings. As that is not your normal way of doing things, up to now.

  Your explanation is what I had figured out also, about the two different running frequencies. Thanks for the reply confirming my question.

   Normally there is no spark gap on this device. At least not on the original schematics shown by Akula, nor Ruslan. Nor have I heard of the antenna signal being used for the purpose of something other than to pulse the push pull inductor/grenade coils, as in the way that Verpies has mentioned.
   Sorry for the confusion with the Kacher coils image that I posted, but, it is the same as I am using. And, yes, there are a lot of things that are very confusing, until we can get to see them in action.

   NickZ

NickZ,

Are the HF oscillations from the TC (>1Mc) supposed to just inductively or capacitively couple to the push pull coil?

PW
   
img  NickZ
Re: Dally, Shark & Ruslan workbench « Reply #1114 on: 2021-06-22, 18:17:06 »
Group: Guest
  PW:
   I think that the idea is that the inductive pulses are to be deadened to some degree, due to all the inverse windings. As shown in the attached diagram that I posted previously. So, that mainly only the capacitive pulses are working.
   Itsu or Vasik can probably explain the above in a clearer fashion.

   NickZ
« Last Edit: 2021-06-22, 19:29:47 by NickZ »
   
img  picowatt
Re: Dally, Shark & Ruslan workbench « Reply #1115 on: 2021-06-22, 18:25:32 »
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 453
Quote from: NickZ on 2021-06-22, 18:17:06
  PW:
   I think that the idea is that the inductive pulses are to be deadened to some degree. Due to all the inverse windings. So, that only the capacitive pulses are working.
   Itsu or Vasik can probably explain the above in a clearer fashion.

   NickZ

NickZ,

I'd be the first to admit my complete confusion regarding how or why this thing is supposed to work.

I thought the TC was supposed to be oscillating/ringing continuously with a specific harmonic and phase relationship to the push pull.

This "only wanting a few cycles" impressed upon the push pull at a particular portion of the PP cycle is news to me and makes even less sense to me as to how this circuit might operate as claimed.

I am hoping someone might enlighten me...

PW
   
img  NickZ
Re: Dally, Shark & Ruslan workbench « Reply #1116 on: 2021-06-22, 18:50:51 »
Group: Guest
   PW:
   Originally the first versions of this device were pulsed by a simple Kacher circuit, unlike the one that is being studied presently.
My version is such as I mentioned above, the simple Kacher. With the main difference being the simple kacher was a non controlable Kacher circuit. And it could be tuned by adding or removing some windings on the secondary coil. Yes, very much like a TC, perhaps even the same as a TC.
It was shown self running by Ruslan, Stalker, Adrian, and others. And was supposed to operate as you mentioned, with no delay, nor other specifics. Therefore it is a simpler Kacher version, which was supposed to self run, however, the push pull as well as the coil lay out is the same.
But, mine as well as most other guys simple Kacher versions, does not self run, as yet. And there began the complications with the controlable versions.
  So, there has been much information, and miss information about how this device is supposed to work. And as the years go by, none of us has been able to disprove, or verify any of this.
   But, the idea now, is to give very high and short HV HF bursts, (shock waves) like 3 to 5 burst of about 3.500kv or higher voltages. And, at a specific frequency, and duty cycle, and possibly also some dead time, on the push pull signal. As this is said to provide for the proper sync between the Kacher and induction circuits, for the magic to be seen.
  I hope that makes you feel better... as you aren't the only one confused. In any case we really need to get to the bottom of all of this. Which is what Itsu has been up to. My thanks to him for his dedication and efforts.

   NickZ
« Last Edit: 2021-06-22, 21:35:40 by NickZ »
   
img  picowatt
Re: Dally, Shark & Ruslan workbench « Reply #1117 on: 2021-06-22, 19:30:42 »
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 453
Quote from: NickZ on 2021-06-22, 18:50:51
   PW:
   Originally the first versions of this device were pulsed by a simple Kacher circuit, unlike the one that is being studied presently.
My version is such as I mentioned above, the simple Kacher. With the main difference being the simple kacher was a non controlable Kacher circuit. And it could be tuned by adding or removing some windings on the secondary coil. Yes, very much like a TC, perhaps even the same as a TC.
It was shown self running by Ruslan, Stalker, Adrian, and others. And was supposed to operate as you mentioned, with no delay, nor other specifics. Therefore it is a simpler Kacher version, which was supposed to self run, however, the push pull as well as the coil lay out is the same.
But, mine as well as most other guys simple Kacher versions, does not self run, as yet. And there began the complications with the controlable versions.
  So, there has been much information, and miss information about how this device is supposed to work. And as the years go by, none of us has been able to disprove, or verify any of this.
   But, the idea now, is to give very high and short HV HF bursts, like 3 to 5 burst, at a specific frequency, duty cycle, and possibly dead time. As this is said to provide for the proper sync between the Kacher and induction circuits, for the magic to be sean.
  I hope that makes you feel better... as you aren't the only one confused. In any case we really need to get to the bottom of all of this. Which is what Itsu has been up to. My thanks to him for his dedication and efforts.

   NickZ

NickZ,

Thank-you very much for your reply.

If anyone else has more to add, I'm all ears...

PW
   
img  verpies
Re: Dally, Shark & Ruslan workbench « Reply #1118 on: 2021-06-22, 19:55:23 »

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3498
Quote from: picowatt on 2021-06-16, 02:13:59
All numbers and values are approximate, both Vbe and Hfe vary significantly with current and temperature (and between devices).  With no emitter degeneration, collector current will vary considerably as Q6's temperature varies.   

It would be nice to know what and how this circuit is supposed to perform. 
I think the following incarnation of the Kacher circuit by the same author mentioned in Reply #93 shows what he had in mind.
In it, you can see the emitter degeneration implemented using a light bulb as well as Zener base-emitter overvoltage protection and neon collector-emitter overvoltage indicator.
« Last Edit: 2021-06-24, 10:36:09 by verpies »
   
img  picowatt
Re: Dally, Shark & Ruslan workbench « Reply #1119 on: 2021-06-22, 20:03:25 »
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 453
Quote from: verpies on 2021-06-22, 19:55:23
I think this incarnation of the Kacher circuit by the same author mentioned in Reply #93 shows what he had in mind.
In it, you can see emitter degeneration implemented using a light bulb as well as Zener base-emitter overvoltage protection and neon collector-emitter overvoltage indicator.

Verpies,

How are only "just a few" of the HV oscillations of the Kacher version Itsu is replicating supposed to make there way onto the push pull?

PW
   
img  verpies
Re: Dally, Shark & Ruslan workbench « Reply #1120 on: 2021-06-22, 20:08:24 »

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3498
Quote from: picowatt on 2021-06-22, 15:38:05
... am I still completely in the dark as to how all this is interconnected?
There should be an overview schemaitic of Stalker's device which is similar to the schematic of the Alexeev's device below:



Edit:
Maybe this one...:
   
img  NickZ
Re: Dally, Shark & Ruslan workbench « Reply #1121 on: 2021-06-22, 20:22:03 »
Group: Guest
    Verpies:
   Yes, that was one of Stalker's earlier simple Kacher circuits. Mine is the same, just without needing the bulbs.
 I use a current choke (not shown) on that diagram, at the input along with the filter caps. It was also a trick getting the choke to work properly, and not allow too much juice to blow the base input of the 5200 transistor. As excessive base voltages and base current have been the cause of more that one 2SC5200 transistor biting the dust.
The DC to DC variable input source is great. But, can cause some trouble as well, if using excessive voltage/current input to the base of that transistor.
  Good to buy those transistors by the kilo.

   Below is the schematic TopRuslan 7, it was also replicated by Stalker. This was the first of the simple Kacher devices. Which is what I have now.
 You can see the added input source choke that I was talking about above, in that diagram.
   But, there are now several different circuits by Stalker for the controlable Kacher versions. Which are never shown working, nor self running, as far as I know. Only the simple Kacher was ever shown running some bulbs, for a couple of seconds, suppose to be self running by Stalker. I could be wrong about that though. After that single self running video, Stalker has never shown anything self running. And probably won't.

   NickZ
   
img  picowatt
Re: Dally, Shark & Ruslan workbench « Reply #1122 on: 2021-06-22, 20:38:54 »
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 453
Quote from: verpies on 2021-06-22, 20:08:24
There should be an overview schemaitic of Stalker's device which is similar to the schematic of the Alexeev's device below:



Verpies,

Thanks for the reply.  The colorful diagram you posted helps me with the coil layouts and drive points.

It is difficult to imagine the inventor's starting point and subsequent evolution and thought processes steering him toward the final result.

Has anyone proposed any theories of operation that might explain a gain mechanism sufficient to explain the ability to self-run?

PW
   
img  verpies
Re: Dally, Shark & Ruslan workbench « Reply #1123 on: 2021-06-22, 20:40:30 »

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3498
Quote from: picowatt on 2021-06-22, 20:03:25
How are only "just a few" of the HV oscillations of the Kacher version Itsu is replicating supposed to make there way onto the push pull?
Take a look at that piece of trivia from NickZ below:

Quote from: NickZ on 2021-06-20, 16:14:34
However, Geofusion has shown that moving his yoke closes or further away from the grenade coils, did seem to change his output.

I can explain this behavior with the exotic ferro-electric phenomenon described in that IEEE article by Konrad & Brudny, where the magnetic properties of certain ferrite types are susceptible to influence by external electric fields.
I have one such ferrite. Its permeability is evidently modulated when subjected to intense external electric fields, e.g. from a Tesla coil.  Perhaps the push-pull circuit drives a winding on such ferrite.

P.S.
In my previous message, I attached another overview diagram. This time from Stalker.
   
img  Itsu
Re: Dally, Shark & Ruslan workbench « Reply #1124 on: 2021-06-22, 20:48:40 »

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 4159
PW,

you ask the same questions we all had and have, so answering will be not so easy.


Stalker / Vasik has mentioned / showed in their video's / PDF translation 2 drivers, one for a Kacher (Kacher control board) and one for a Tesla coil (Tesla coil control board) see the diagrams in rk_rev2.PDF page 34 and 35 attached below in which they are mentioned.

The one i am presently using is the Transistor driven "Kacher control board".

The ferrite gizmo is between the secondary and the antenna, see a picture of my set up below.

The 4 or 5 HV pulses on the antenna suppose to be injected into the inductor which is inside the antenna and which on its own is coupled to the Grenade.

The disrution causing the magic can not been seen i guess, just noticed by the device running itself or by measuring the ground wire where the power should be pumped from.

Good suggestion on trying to detect the "corona/brush discharges" i will see if i can do that.

The HF oscillations from the TC (>1Mc) supposed to create an electric field around the push pull coil.

Itsu
   
Pages: 1 ... 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 [45] 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 ... 101
« previous next »


 

Home Help Search Login Register
Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u 2024-11-26, 08:57:17