# A problem of "overunity" in a switched capacitor bank circuit?!

Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by David E. Cowlishaw, Jul 23, 2010.

Not open for further replies.
1. ### David E. Cowlishaw Thread Starter New Member

Jul 23, 2010
0
0
Hi folks;

In an attempt to build an ideal, low resistance loss, mostly reactive power circuit to operate a sharp magnetic pulse through a coil of an electromagnetic healing aid (see the "Thumpy" files on keelynet.com), I have what looks like an "overunity" result in the circuit's operation.

For ease of first build, I decided on a mechanical switching concept to start with.

Here's the concept:

A high amperage, high voltage, rapid discharge pulse is supplied to a pancake wrapped electromagnetic coil, used to assist in the body's natural healing, apparently by lowering the cell wall's potential barrier in the ion channels, thus requiring less energy for cells to operate and regenerate themselves.

That is the rationale for building the following circuit, but the solution to improving the problem of high power consumption, has lead to another MORE interesting problem!

The circuit as envisioned so far, is comprised of two switched capacitor banks (non-polar caps), to supply, then recapture the unused (not magnetically coupled by the body) charge through a coil.

A description:

Two banks of switched capacitors supply a high voltage charge on one side of the coil with the charged capacitors in series (with a self-resetting triggered semiconductor such as a triac or SCS to prevent oscillation), then recapture the unused portion of that charge in a second, discharged capacitor bank, switched into parallel.

For example, 10 capacitors charged to 12 volts while in parallel, are switched into a series stack, giving us 120 volts at the ends of the 10 capacitor stack.

The second capacitor bank is switched into parallel with a ganged slide switch that alternates with an inverse series/parallel arrangement for both capacitor banks.

The coil is in series between the capacitor banks, and switched on through a series semiconductor that resets once current stops between the banks, preventing oscillation.

Assume that the second bank was discharged to 12 volts while in series, and when switched into parallel, that gives us a 1.2 volt remainder charge on the capacitors in parallel, awaiting the rush of electrons through the coil.

Here's the problem:

While capacitors can store power statically as potential energy, coils store power dynamically, acting much like a flywheel in rotating mechanical systems.

From our knowlege of resonant tank circuits with a single capacitor and coil, the capacitor will discharge it's positive voltage to Zero volts through the coil, but the coil is now at maximum amperage through it, and once zero volts is reached on the capacitor, the now collapsing magnetic field acts like a voltage source, and drives the capacitor negative, and in a high Q circuit, nearly equal in voltage (minus resistive losses) but negative in sign.

With this mental experiment, trigger the triac, allowing the 120 V+ in the series cap stack to conduct through the coil, into the awaiting 1.2+ volt capacitor bank in parallel.

Once the capacitors reach equalibrium (say, 12 volts+ on the series stack, and 12 volts+ on the parallel bank), we now have maximum amperage (and maximum magnetic field strength) through the coil.

Amperage will still be going the same way as the coil's field collapses, and the parallel bank will charge to MORE than 12 volts+, while the series capacitors are further discharged through zero volts, and will go negative, until the field has completely collapsed, and current ceases!

Then the self-resetting semiconductor switch will turn off, preventing oscillation or return current.

I haven't done the math with real world parts to arrive at the final destination voltage on both capacitor banks, but intuitively, the parallel receiving bank will be almost double our starting charge (say almost 24 volts+), and the series capacitor bank will be almost our starting series voltage (minus our initial 12 volt offset, perhaps -108 Volts) with a strong negative charge!

Now, switch the series exhausted supply side capacitor bank to parallel, and the now charged parallel capacitors into series, and repeat.
We now have about 240 volts+ with the charged capacitors switched into series, and about -10.8 volts on the 10 discharged capacitors switched into parallel!

As you can see, if we run this circuit by triggering it for more than a few cycles, we will blow up our capacitors, or melt our coil, unless excess power is bled off into a resistive load!

Can you find the flaw in my logic?

I have graphics and animations if you would like me to send them, as well as a 3D model detailing the slide switch made from double copper clad circuit board material.

Fun!

Moderator's note: Obvious come-on removed

Last edited by a moderator: Jul 23, 2010
2. ### Wendy Moderator

Mar 24, 2008
20,772
2,540
There is no such thing as overunity, it a very fundamental law of physics. If you could create energy from nothingness, you could create matter, matter and energy are the same thing. Might as well draw a pentagram and mutter a spell to make a gold amulet.

More than likely you are seeing a boost in voltage with no current. This is a matter of interpretation of data.

Apr 5, 2008
15,802
2,388
4. ### beenthere Retired Moderator

Apr 20, 2004
15,815
283
Let's see, another scammer is looking for some sort of approval, even if by default, by having a post on this site.

Sounds quite dramatic. The problem is the location of this exotic coil (why are these things always described as misleadingly as possible? - pancake wrap indeed! - so as to imply some very exotically different effect by means not quite described). Why is a pulse supposed to have a lasting effect? For real-world stuff, check on "electroporation". It's a known proceedure, and lasts just as long as the discharge. It also kills the majority of cells affected by the pulse. Not at all smart to try on your own cells.

Betcha can't come up with a schematic to accomplish the switching.

Of course - you are describing a perpetual motion device. Nobody but a fool would invest in one, and nobody but a scam artist would seriously propose one.