I would like to say something about this circuit.

I understand when I talk about this it seems to offend some people, and that is just the opposite of what I am trying to achieve.

 

This circuit is not unusual but it is also not usual, because it came to be in the very early 1900s.

The transformer style component within the circuit would have been called a magnetic amplifier.

The secondary winding of the magnetic amplifier was supplied with an external current to be used to alter the magnetic fields within the iron core to limit current

on the primary line.

I discovered that I can create the same scenario of controlling the magnetic fields within the iron core without adding a secondary current, achieving the same desired

effect but with an added benefit.

That is simply what I am trying to point out, the process can be achieved with an alternate method that can ultimately increase efficiency if used correctly.

I’m sorry if I have created any confusion.

It’s difficult to try to explain something when there are people who really don’t want to hear it.

 

2 hours ago, Bcook said:

I would like to say something about this circuit.

I understand when I talk about this it seems to offend some people, and that is just the opposite of what I am trying to achieve.

 

This circuit is not unusual but it is also not usual, because it came to be in the very early 1900s.

The transformer style component within the circuit would have been called a magnetic amplifier.

The secondary winding of the magnetic amplifier was supplied with an external current to be used to alter the magnetic fields within the iron core to limit current

on the primary line.

I discovered that I can create the same scenario of controlling the magnetic fields within the iron core without adding a secondary current, achieving the same desired

effect but with an added benefit.

That is simply what I am trying to point out, the process can be achieved with an alternate method that can ultimately increase efficiency if used correctly.

I’m sorry if I have created any confusion.

 

It’s difficult to try to explain something when there are people who really don’t want to hear it.

 

I agree entirely with the underlined statement so you can well imagine my frustration having a one sided discussion with you.

 

I also agree that the above post is the first time what you have said is mostly in accord with engineering electrical theory.

Pity you were not listening when I told you exactly this back on page 1 and so did not ask to take this further.

 

On 8/3/2024 at 6:06 PM, studiot said:

In fact your video short circuiting the transformer is a standard method of measuring one of the important circuit parameters.

 

Hello Bcook. I'm not a Physics expert as others in this forum, but I have, by now, read over 10 books from scientists past (Robert Hooke, Isaac Newton, Michael Faraday, Avicenna) and I can ratify that, even if the old books are good to bring new ideas, they don't have any secret science hidden behind them. You won't find the new thing by scrutinizing old knowledge or books.

You won't find a magical answer by searching something about Nikola Tesla, for example.

These are my 2 cents for you, as I have struggled in the past discerning good knowledge from bad knowledge. There are no easy answers in the past or a plot to keep knowledge from you.

8 hours ago, obbeel said:

as I have struggled in the past discerning good knowledge from bad knowledge. There are no easy answers in the past or a plot to keep knowledge from you.

Outside of formal education studying the textbooks is the best way to separate science from pseudoscience (flimflams etc)

If an article doesn't conform to textbook book methods or answers then it's questionable.

Another good resource is dissertation papers. These papers will help advance your skills and knowledge beyond the textbooks which typically teach the basics.

Welcome aboard

Edited September 15, 20241 yr by Mordred

On 8/3/2024 at 5:15 PM, Bcook said:

If I analyze your statement, it sounds like you are saying AC does not have a circular magnetic field?

Hello again @Bcook

Since I see you are back I thought perhaps you might like an answer to this question.

The pictures @joigus drew for you show the lines around a steady unidirectional current (D C)

The actual lines around an ac source are too complicated for a still diagram, since the currenet polarity (or direction) is always changing as it build up to a maximum, then declined to zero and then builds up to a maximum the other way, then declines to zero again, repetitively.

As a consequence the arcs traced out will be circular but not complete circles, depending upon the frequency and distance from the current wire.

To complicate matters further such a change constitutes a disturbance that propagates at the speed of light outwardly from the wire so if you go far enough the effect of the current change will not have had time to reach that larger circle path.

The animation, due to NASA give the idea

Of course at the distance involved with your equipment we don't need to worry about this.

Let it go @studiot .
After all, even D Trump says that no one knows what magnets are ...

Trump, 79, Claims Nobody Knows What a Magnet Is

surely you don't doubt anything D Trump says !

Looking at your diagram ( Agust 3rd 2024)

it appears to me that you are trying to use the inductance of the transformer primary and the capacitor as a series tuned circuit at resonance. In such a circuit the voltage across those two components can easily exceed the input voltage. You then assume you can tap off some of that voltage to do useful work. However transformers can easily exceed 95% efficiency so the transformer with a resistive load will act as an almost pure resistor with a small amount of inductance. The net result of this is that any power delivered to the circuit by the generator will be shared between the resistor connected to the transformer secondary winding and that required to drive the motor. In other words I think that the addition of a transformer would reduce the circuit efficiency even if you achieved the circuit's resonant frequency. Note power factor correction is usually achieved with capacitance connected in parallel with the inductive load. There are reasons for that, but that's another story.

Edited November 14Nov 14 by OldTony

Theorizing whats going on in this circuit will be incorrect.

Actual test data is what tells the real story.

If I tried to explain whats going on and I have, I would be told I'm wrong and I don't understand,

It's been third party tested many times, it's very predictable and proven, even if most don't believe, the testers do believe,

they just don't understand the math.

In this case, changing the operating principles of one component, changes everything.

This circuit is about field control. Non linear directional fields

It's nice to see it being looked at though.

1 hour ago, Bcook said:

Theorizing whats going on in this circuit will be incorrect. ""

Surely the whole idea of a circuit diagram is to provide the means to work out what is going on?

Edited November 15Nov 15 by OldTony