Resonance and high frequency

[citfta]

Hi Ufo,

I'll try to answer some of that.  Here is the formula for calculating the resonant frequency of a LC circuit:  f = 1 /  (2 pi x sqrt (L x C))

My keyboard doesn't have scientific notation so I couldn't put in the proper symbols for pi and square root.

To use this formula you put in the capacitance in Farads and the inductance in Henries.

Here is a link for calcutating the resonant frequency of just the coil. :  http://radiantarc.com/tools/calculate_coil_resonant_frequency.php

If you go to near the bottom of the page you can see that the length of wire needed for a given frequency is dependant on the gauge of the wire when wound into a typical solenoid shaped coil.

Yes you can certainly design a coil that will be resonant at 50 or 60 Hz.  However getting it to be sharply resonant at those low of frequencies is a little more difficult.  The sharpness of an LC circuit is called the Q of the circuit.  Here is a link describing how Q works and giving formulas for calculating the Q.  :https://www.allaboutcircuits.com/textbook/alternating-current/chpt-6/q-and-bandwidth-resonant-circuit/

This page also explains the effect of adding resistance to the circuit.  As I explained about the nonsense promoted by Don Smith adding resistance only changes the Q of the circuit.  It does not change the resonant frequency of the circuit.

Respectfully,
Carroll
 

[Classic]

This is misunderstanding citfta, the highest frequency represented in an LC, in this case RLC is length of wire and we need to tune this circuit to resonate at this frequency, this is why we adjust inductance and capacitance, otherwise will resonate at different frequency.

Calculations to determine inductance at desired resonant frequency must start in this order where we know length of wire and frequency. Once we find out inductance value, we can calculate capacitance.

After calculating capacitance we can start to play around, reducing capacitance in respect with frequency ... means we need to reduce at minimum capacitance to obtain high response from coil, than observe capacitance has changed resonant frequency and we start to adjust inductance which should go higher as capacitance decrease ... this is where resistor in parallel comes in play and reduce inductance to match resonant frequency.
So, adjusting or tuning for resonance RLC after inductance and capacitance has been found is made with capacitors and resistors, Once frequency and coil geometry is in place.

Using multiple of 1/2 wave length for the length of wire for LC gives the maximum amplitude in operation and also helps to find the right length of wire for secondary. In secondary we adjust number of turns for desired voltage by playing with wire thickness.

I can suggest to use a coil calculator before start winding to find the right geometry which can be achieved diy and/or materials available

The higher is the frequency, the higher need to be accuracy and precision of build.
So, would be a bit impractical for diy to choose 200 mhz or 10 ghz as I doubt that such precision may be achieved by clasic methods. But, if one seek to work at such high frequency a different method should be employed using different materials in nano scale.

Also, bear in mind desired output and make a wise choice, knowing what voltage will be reasonably provided as input as power output will go up with square of frequency and square of voltage. This means we need to consider if we have available components to bring it down to be usable without adding bespoke components for this.

In all this enterprise we need to consider availability of materials and components and cost effectiveness.

Also, do not be confused by different methods for different input of voltage and frequency as many are doing this.

If Don Smith methods are analysed please note he presented more than one method, but all of them are based on Tesla apparatus for utilising radiant energy and each method refer to different method as shown in fig 1,2,3,4 of the patent. Mixing them  up won't bring the expected results.
So, Don Smith have replaced the high elevated plate with resonant coils and plasma tube (fig4 in Tesla patent).

But, I guess you all know already all these details that have be proved along your vast practice and experience. So, please excuse the use of so many words probably unnecessary.

If they are of no help for anyone please delete as appropriate.

I have wounded a lot of coils and I am pissed off of how much it cost altogether, so i keep looking to make a device that will cost no more than £200 if everything is bought brand new, if I can't do it I have no interest to build another toy for the rich to be added on their collection diplay.

I agree with most of what you have posted except for the parts I high-lighted.  Adding a resistor in parallel will not change the resonant frequency.  I also disagree that the wire in a coil has to be a 1/2 wavelength.  The configuration of the coil and the coil core material affect the frequency of the coil much more than the exact length of the wire. You say you have wound many coils so take one of your coils and connect it to a frequency generator or sweep analyzer or any other method you choose and show us the resonant frequency.  Then add your resistor in parallel and show us the frequency change.
I won't waste my time commenting again about Don Smith. 
Respectfully,
Carroll

Well, if you want to debate on a exact specific arrangement, it might be easy to see that this bloody resistor that gives you so much headaches might not be compulsory if you can make the coil exact to what it takes and you consider wire resistance in first place.
So, we may or may not use a resistor in parallel ... but as long as you raised the question and suggesting is wrong, I have tried to explain as much as I could, and parallel resistors should not be disregarded at first hand.

Now, regarding wire length and why myself in agreement with inventors afore mentioned is the utmost importance for resonance and we shouldn't rely heavy on expensive tools as long as a simple hand calculator can be used.

So, if connection points are at the exact 1/2 of wave length or multiple of it will allow to collect maximum amplitude where multiple harmonic and subharmonic waves are superimposed and amplification is extraordinary high just because of this. So calculations must be done with as many decimals as possible and the higher frequency goes the higher accuracy is needed (i have discovered this in hard way, by not paying sufficient attention).

So, if you rely on oscilloscope only, you can see all this harmonics and subharmonics happening but if they do not coincide with connection points they are useless and possible causing destructive effects. Then you may conclude that nothing special is happening in a certain setup.( please read patent NL1032750 Arie deGeus where this aspect is explained - see attachment).

Also, it seems that you can not observe the mechanism I am trying to describe or my explanations are failing to achieve.
I am not contesting physical properties of coils and cores or their effect, what I am saying is after you have produced desired coil instead of changing geometry it can be adjusted as follow: inductance by manipulating resistance and its own capacitance with capacitors in order to keep and maintain resonant frequency which is dictated by the length of wire used to make the coil. (Note that Floyd sweet have made adjustments by sniping half millimetre by half millimetre of the coil length).

So, as long as our aim in such system is to move energy into magnetic field, decent amount of inductance is required to allow it. ... bear in mind, we produce electricity with the help of magnetic and not the opposite. Capacitance must be as small as possible to allow a quick reaction and not storage in electric field, as voltage is amplified in secondary windings. Capacitance is in tide relationship with frequency and is taken in account when we calculate RLC for exact specific resonant frequency.

Now, using 1/4 in primary will allow you to use 1/2 in secondary and keep the resonance while much more turns means voltage amplification. If you really want to go deep I can say you can calculate power per impulse from primary than calculate power per impulse in secondary than see how much power you have per minute/hour according to frequency rate of this pulse.

Probably won't be necessary to say but, i prefer to mention that at resonance power transfer is considered in ideal conditions (no ohmic dc resistance in wires) as 100% efficient because capacitive and inductive reactance nullify each other. So, exact length of wire is compulsory in such systems and minimal losses will occur due to wire resistance.

Unfortunately (or not quite), i do not own an oscilloscope and I cannot perform actions suggested. My heavy reliance on simple hand calculator and formulas are more than enough and few days ago i just blown up my last multimeter due to my negligence. So for the moment I can only use empirical adhoc methods hooking up know loads until I will get some few more items including multimeter.

I don't want to upset anyone, but in my opinion in most of the cases we don't need such expensive tools as such arrangements really do not require due to simplicity. Some people may do go mad of I am saying that Tesla didn't use an oscilloscope, nor Figuera or Daza or Cook and Don Smith neither. Instead Don Smith have revealed a simple solution using a fluorescent tube and its connection wires ... showing even more with that, that electricity simply flow outside the coil wire.

In my humble opinion conductors are just guidance (artificial guidance) for the energy flow and this energy is present everywhere.

[Classic]

Hello to All,

Interesting conversation, it has become on this Topic...

And due that my limited knowledge about finding Resonant Points, and resonance in general is not too wide, as I do not have much experience...except for the basic knowledge given...as I have NOT done much experiments on the related.

I have a simple question for both of you (Citfta & Classic), since I have you here.

Is it possible to reach a Resonant Point, or range, even a narrow one, at LOW Frequencies, like 50 or 60 Hertz?

And I am referring specifically to a normal LC Circuit (Coil or Coils and a Capacitor)

*******************************

On a separate note...about the Resistance debate part on LC Circuit(s)...

In my opinion, we cannot completely neglect the existence of a resistance value in ANY related Coil...because coils would always have a resistance...and resistance would always have a direct effect on Inductance, no matter if on a plain LC Formula, it is only considered the Inductance value.

We all know that the more the resistance we add on a Coil (the more turns we add, or the finer the wire we use), the LESS Inductance value we will have, therefore, both parameters are related inversely.

At the same token, the more turns we add on a coil, the higher its Inductance, because Voltage would increase and so EMF...However, "the more turns" will add more resistance...

So, I see here a "Paradox" or a "closed loop", that will keep us going in circles at the time of finding a great, robust Inductance on a coil, with very low values on resistance...it results almost impossible?

Ending up in using a Coarser wire...to reduce resistance, and be able to add more turns, fine...BUT THEN, we will increase Currents!!...at Input, I am referring to, of course...and we do not want that...

So, it is a "never ending closed loop"...

And the only way that I see out of this "loop"...is the use of Super Conducting Magnetic Wire...but prices are on the ridiculously sky high, unreachable levels...

Regards

Ufopolitics

Few calculators:
https://kaizerpowerelectronics.dk/calculators/helical-coil-calculator/
https://www.omnicalculator.com/physics
https://www.teslascientific.com/products/resonant-frequency-calculator/

You may find that kaizerpowerelectronics may have a better approach regarding your aim and be aware that capacitance must be added manual in desired/calculated value.

Let me stress out to mention again that resonance itself won't do anything if connection points do not match ends of wire, middle tap or 1/4 tap as your requirements. So, length of wire is important in my opinion.

So, my answer is: Yes, you can ... manipulate capacitance to lower frequency response, i mean if your wires are shorter for such resonant frequency you need to add more capacitance. Use calculators from links provided and enjoy.

See attached calculus for wire length necessary for resonant frequency at 50 hz ... determine inductance, or redo calculus for multiple of 1/2 wave length as I really doubt you are going to use Km of wire in your coils, then determine inductance by playing with Kaizer or Omni calculator for coil geometry (assuming it is a solenoid), than check for required capacitance to be added. If your secondaries match same multiple of 1/2 of the primary will will get a resonant system.

[Ufopolitics]

Hi Ufo,

I'll try to answer some of that.  Here is the formula for calculating the resonant frequency of a LC circuit:  f = 1 /  (2 pi x sqrt (L x C))

My keyboard doesn't have scientific notation so I couldn't put in the proper symbols for pi and square root.

To use this formula you put in the capacitance in Farads and the inductance in Henries.

Here is a link for calcutating the resonant frequency of just the coil. :  http://radiantarc.com/tools/calculate_coil_resonant_frequency.php

If you go to near the bottom of the page you can see that the length of wire needed for a given frequency is dependant on the gauge of the wire when wound into a typical solenoid shaped coil.

Yes you can certainly design a coil that will be resonant at 50 or 60 Hz.  However getting it to be sharply resonant at those low of frequencies is a little more difficult.  The sharpness of an LC circuit is called the Q of the circuit.  Here is a link describing how Q works and giving formulas for calculating the Q.  :https://www.allaboutcircuits.com/textbook/alternating-current/chpt-6/q-and-bandwidth-resonant-circuit/

This page also explains the effect of adding resistance to the circuit.  As I explained about the nonsense promoted by Don Smith adding resistance only changes the Q of the circuit.  It does not change the resonant frequency of the circuit.

Respectfully,
Carroll
 

Thanks Citfta,

Those are very useful links!

The more I look into this, the more I am convinced, that being able to play with resonant points in our Figuera Method(s) the more the success we will have.

Since once we find a specific resonant point, we then can vary, above or below such point, to reach greater desired inductance values, as we decrease impedance and resistance...and of course, these terms reverse as we use parallel instead of series circuit(s).

On a Brushless typical home generator (not the brushed ones, because it is a simple self-or mutual inductance AC, converted back to DC and to Exciter field through direct conductors, including brushes on continuous slip rings)
However, on a Brushless type, all changes, there is a "remote" constant back and forth, MUTUAL transfer of energy, which is completely infinite, as long as the exciter magnetic field keeps moving...

The Brushless Exciter Field Coil is simply a CLOSED circuit, with a Diode and a Varistor all in PARALLEL with Coil's two terminals...while the Stator Field is also a Parallel LC circuit, but with a running cap and coils only.

As we just start moving the Field, without any external input, and with the assistance with just a tiny magnet or magnetic reminiscence OR the AC running cap retaining some energy stored, energy starts flowing and increasing within seconds...then Varistor controls/regulates voltage not to exceed specified values at exciter field.

And above lays the "whole secret" to make our Figuera to be self feeded...just by moving our magnetic fields...

Regards

Ufopolitics

[Classic]

Have a look at this patent and tell me if there is any similarities in some recent inventions analysed for ou.

https://patents.google.com/patent/US568176A/en