RE: High voltage extremely low currents

Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by Ynot1980, Dec 16, 2009.

  1. Ynot1980

    Thread Starter New Member

    Dec 16, 2009
    11
    0
    I knew after posting parts of that post sounded snippy and would draw fire but I just started posting here and was not sure if I could edit after posting. I am not trying to draw fire. Please, I have nothing I am trying to sell to anyone. I have very little understanding of electricity and thought I would ask those who did. I went off in million different directions instead of just asking my question and now there is a giant purple elephant in the room.
    Quote:
    there is correct temp and moisture in the air a current will flow as a spark is created between the two connections (as the air vaporizes), is this correct?
    "No, the air ionizes and can carry current. Google "ionization"."

    I am sorry. I simply typed it incorrectly as I was reciting what I had just read to make sure I understood it correctly.
    Quote:
    And I just want to remind everyone we are just now starting to consider the effects of creating electrical devices with components that have matching resonance frequencies;
    "I am sure that people working in radio will be happy to hear it."

    I know this is a consideration in radio. I mean to say that insuring like frequencies for the components of wireless power transmission devices(something that has been around for a long time) such as the work of WiTricity was not correctly consider by earlier developers of the technology such as Powercast. Now that WiTricity is making the resonance frequencies of the components top priority they have made leaps and bounds in the field. I just mean to say wireless power transmission has been around a long time. The knowledge of resonance frequencies has been around a long time (Radio). Only now has the consideration of one in the other caused advancements that could have been made a long time ago. There is nothing in the basic tech that WiTricity is doing now that could not have been done years ago if someone had made the consideration then.
    Quote:
    Now that people are considering this things can be done with electricity that could not be done before (WiTricity) and the truth is it could have been done from the beginning but aspects of resonance where pretty much not considered then.
    "Can you say just what those aspects of resonance are that have escaped notice until just now?"

    See above.

    ""It's just a theory", stated dismissively, is supposed to open the door for just everything, right? Perpetual motion (overunity being a subset of that), flying saucers, secret symbols, and vast government (or corporate) conspiracies of silence."

    I'm not sure I follow this one. I was not dismissing any of the standing theories. Simply stating the truth: they are theories that hold up under currently available testing; they are not fact. I know I am not the only one who has heard or read that it is becoming considered that the speed of light is not constant. That is a pretty big one to have gotten wrong. However if it does turn out the speed of light is not constant we didn't get it wrong as much as only got it right to the extent of our testing. All I was trying to say in the beginning was that my mind realized that it is possibly for what was once thought to be true to be later found false no matter how many times it was proven correct previously.

    Like I said in the beginning, I have very little knowledge of electricity. I thought I made it clear I came here to try and gain greater understanding of these things. I have no propaganda to sell. I was not trying to open anyone's mind or anything like that. My comments were meant to convey that I would accept all types of input on these subjects, traditional or otherwise. The rest of that post I'm not so sure about.
    I do not believe there is some one new understanding that will make all things possible. However new doors to new things open all the time; sometimes even doors to things we previous did not think possible.
    As far as the whole perpetual motion machine comment. I asked these types of questions here because I do not have any existing knowledge. I'm not saying anything works or does not work. I am aware of the popular opinion. I came to get an education on why that was; not to argue against it. I did not know it violated any laws to get back out of something what you put in. I know most things are not that efficient but I did not know there was a law that stated it was impossible for something to be that efficient. I thought I had stated that I knew there were other factors that would bring the device to an eventual stop. I was not trying to make it run forever or anything; wouldn't that be perpetual motion. I did want to create if possible a self propelled device that would run for a duration of before coming to rest. At no time did I expect it to create more power than the needs of its own energy consumption. I did not expect it to run continuously and endless without outside input. So I am not sure how I described a perpetual motion machine. I am not trying to build any such machine, no generators, or free energy machines. I would never expect such a device to have a usable out mechanical or electrical. That is not what I am trying to do. I just want to build a toy and project. The only thing I should have stated from the beginning is...

    Is there a way, no matter how in-depth or in-practical the production would be (I'm not trying to create power so I don't care how much is used to produce the device), to use the voltage generated by devices such as PZT grill igniters to power an electromagnet in pulses. so it turns on an off as you click the igniter? Not so much turns on and off as just on intermittently. I know there is some guy Bruce A. Perreault who says you can convert static electricity into higher current power but I am not sure if that is true or if it applies. But it seems you need more current present than the "pzt igniter electromagnet circuit" generates to actually power the electromagnet. It seems to me I have answered my own question but I just want to know if there is something I am missing because I have no knowledge of what I am talking about. Different people have different answers for this question as I have asked it. But I would like an answer from someone who is not trying to sell me the secret answers to the universe.
     
  2. beenthere

    Retired Moderator

    Apr 20, 2004
    15,815
    282
    Very briefly - Mr. Perrault is a scammer.

    We have had many, many scams get posted here, and spent what seems a nearly infinite time refuting them. The sticky note announcing that we don not deal with free energy has links to most of these threads.

    Some basic texts on physics adn electronics can immunize you against scammer's claims. The "Dummy's Guide to ..." series gives some grounding. Our Ebook has good information.

    A favorite basis for a scam is somehow exploiting resonance effects. Please note that a mechanical or electronic resonance may be maintained with only a small amount of energy put into the system, but the system comes to rest when that energy is withdrawn, or the resonant energy is drawn upon. There is no such thing as a free lunch.
     
  3. Wendy

    Moderator

    Mar 24, 2008
    20,766
    2,536
    Resonance enhances coupling, it increases efficiencies, but it can not exceed 100%. If you get 90% efficiency you are doing well.

    Scammers love to obfuscate simple concepts. They will show you an increase in voltage and say "See, free energy!". What they aren't saying is this is half the equation, the Watts (or horsepower) stays the same (actually, there are always losses). Watts is voltage times current (P = I X V), so there are no gains, but they depend on lack of technical knowledge from their victims to sell their snake oil.
     
  4. Ynot1980

    Thread Starter New Member

    Dec 16, 2009
    11
    0
    Thank you. If you don't mind continuing a conversation with me over time I have a million questions. I will try to read through the materials here so as not to make you answer all the same questions or at least try to ask it in a new as to make it a little more interesting for you to regurgitate the answer again.
     
  5. Wendy

    Moderator

    Mar 24, 2008
    20,766
    2,536
    As a suggestion, break it down into small pieces. If you go over 2 paragraphs you are getting ahead of yourself.
     
  6. Ynot1980

    Thread Starter New Member

    Dec 16, 2009
    11
    0
    Ok, just to make sure I understand:
    In electrical circuits there is no component, device, mechanism, or method by which a the high voltage in a low current in one portion of the circuit can be exchanged or converted for an increase in current but a reduction in volts passing to the rest of the circuit. Do I have that correct?

    I do appreciate the time you guys spend answering these questions. I will try not to turn into "Gorga The Dead Horse Better"
     
  7. Wendy

    Moderator

    Mar 24, 2008
    20,766
    2,536
    Actually, you just described an AC transformer, which was invented by Dr. Tesla. Multiply the current and voltage of each side and you get something very close to the same number (which is wattage). The output is always a little less than the input (that is loss). A transformer is one of the more efficient devices invented by man, around 95% conversion, give or take.

    Wattage is power, it translates directly into horsepower. Voltage by itself is not a unit of work, neither is current.
     
  8. studiot

    AAC Fanatic!

    Nov 9, 2007
    5,005
    513
    This is good advice. I read but didn't understand post#1 here.
     
  9. Ynot1980

    Thread Starter New Member

    Dec 16, 2009
    11
    0
    Ok, going back to the pzt grill igniter example, at the point just before the spark occurs there is a current flowing towards the spark gap. From what I have read the volts of the current is around 1.5KV. Or from what I understand the force on the pzt ceramic will cause a voltage of around 1.5KV to become present on the suface of the ceramnic. When the right conditions are present a current will flow towards the spark gap and arc.

    When everyting is right and the circuit sparks I can determin there was 1.5KV of voltage in the circuit before the spark. Is that Right?

    Now, how can determin what the current was?
     
  10. Ynot1980

    Thread Starter New Member

    Dec 16, 2009
    11
    0
    Studiot, post#1 was mostly an apology to Beenthere for my original thread. The last paragraph of post #1 of this thread is all that is important now. I will try to be less confusing and more to the point with future posts.
     
  11. studiot

    AAC Fanatic!

    Nov 9, 2007
    5,005
    513
    I think others have gently suggested boning up on some basic physics.

    Your view of the action of piezo electricity in general and grill igniters in particular is a long way from reality.

    No large currrent flows anywhere. Current is measured in amps or some super or sub multiple thereof, not KV.

    A piezo device is a method of converting mechanical energy into electrical energy. Nothing more mysterious or esoteric than that.
    Certain crystals develop a voltage across their faces in response to mechanical strain. The mechanical energy provided by the striker distorts the shape of such a crystal; this is another word for mechanical strain so a voltage is developed across the face. The sharper the strike the higher the voltage -again nothing suprising there.
    This voltage is used to good effect by connecting these opposing faces to electrodes, spaced so that a spark will ensue.

    If you really believe that kilovolts and kiloamps are involved put your finger in the way of the spark. You will quickly find out that the correct prefix is micro.
     
  12. Ynot1980

    Thread Starter New Member

    Dec 16, 2009
    11
    0
    Please, I am not being argumentative, but I never implied that there was anything mysterious about piezo materials nor did I say or imply current was measured in volts, I said 1.5KV charge was present on the surface of the crystal in the igniter when stuck (that is what the manufacture said) and that the amount of voltage required to get a spark could vary depending on conditions in the air. How is that different from what you said?

    I understand the current is incredibly small. I just asked if there was a manner of measuring or determining the current no matter how small it may be. I don't know how wanting to test an existing devices translates into thinking that device is mystical.
     
  13. Ynot1980

    Thread Starter New Member

    Dec 16, 2009
    11
    0
    I am not trying to figure out or discover anything new to the world here. That context needs to be removed from this conversation. Somewhere along the way it was decided I was on a quest to put pzt to task to generate electricity without the outside mechanical input to make it work. That just is not the case.

    I simply want to know if I beat on it long enough and fast enough can I over time build up enough charge in say a capacitor to eventually discharge a decent amount of power Volts X Amps for a period of time. That is pretty strait forward. I thought the military had experimented with this in boots until they decided the added strain on the soldier was not worth it.

    It doesn't seem to me that anything I want to do is new or mysterious. It does not violate any laws of physics and it has already been done. I was hoping for a little help and understanding to reproduce results that have already been achieved. Again, I am not on a quest for something new, I just want to better understand what is already being done.
     
  14. Paulo540

    Member

    Nov 23, 2009
    188
    0
    How much power are you hypothetically trying to achieve? The current from a piezo is probably on the order of uA if not smaller.
     
  15. Ynot1980

    Thread Starter New Member

    Dec 16, 2009
    11
    0
    In the neighborhood of 1-3 Watts
     
  16. Ynot1980

    Thread Starter New Member

    Dec 16, 2009
    11
    0
    NOT using an actual grill igniter.
     
  17. Ynot1980

    Thread Starter New Member

    Dec 16, 2009
    11
    0
    Thank you for your answer. Do you mind explaining how that can be determined or figured?
     
  18. studiot

    AAC Fanatic!

    Nov 9, 2007
    5,005
    513
    That question is indeed pretty straightforward and one technical people can answer.

    You could indeed charge up a capacitor with a modified piezo device, a bit at a time. However the conversion rate is so inefficient that it would take an excessive number of charge cycles to attain a worthwhile charge.

    A magnetic solution would be much more practicable. There are hand driven battery chargers on the market that work by squeezing a hand driven spring loaded dynamo repeatedly.

    Another possibility is to use some other storage medium, perhaps mechanical, and generate the electricity as needed. The wind up radios that store energy in a spring work like this. They have been a great success in under developed countries.

    However I still feel you need to revise you physics concepts. Charge is not measured in KV either.
    It is just easier if you leave introducing the technical terms to the specialists here ( by all means ask for an explanation of them)

    Attached is a calculation to answer your question.
     
  19. studiot

    AAC Fanatic!

    Nov 9, 2007
    5,005
    513
    My apologies, in my enthusiasm to publish the calculations a couple of bogies crept in.

    firstly the force applied is 30 newtons.

    secondly the mechanically related change in polarisation is not related to the voltage generated ΔV, but to the strain and thus the stress and thus the applied force. The equation quoted is however correct. Hopefully the text now makes mores sense.
     
    Last edited: Dec 18, 2009
  20. Wendy

    Moderator

    Mar 24, 2008
    20,766
    2,536
    Most of the 1st year of college for electronics types is spent learning terms. There are a lot of them. In the long run there isn't any escaping the math either. For example, we use prefixes to describe the scale of something. Electronics goes from the very very small to the large. Most of it is pretty small.

    pico - X 10E-12 (0.000000000001)
    nano - X 10E-9 (0.000000001)
    micro - X 10E-6 (0.000001)
    milli - X 10E-3 (0.001)
    kilo - X 10E3 (1000)
    meg - X 10E6 (1000000)
    gig - X 10E9 (1000000000)
    terra - X 10E12 (1000000000000)

    Anytime you see one of these words in front of a measurement (such as volts) the multiplication shown kicks in. Most electronics is very small.

    With small arcs (such as a piezo igniter) you might have several kilovolts, but current will be nanoamps or smaller. Goes back to the wattage concept I mentioned earlier, there just isn't much power (which is the important number) there.

    1 Kilovolt X 1 Nanoamp = 1 microwatt

    or

    1000 Volts X 0.000000001 Amps = 0.000001 Watts.
     
Loading...