Author Options:

High Frequency Alternators Answered

Look at a picture of some arcs from a common spark-gap Tesla Coil, and then compare it to the arcs from a solid-state. What makes the two so different? The difference comes from the Solid-State Tesla Coil to operate in CW (constant wave) mode. This means that its power supply is uninterrupted, whereas in a spark-gap type, power is being switched on and off hundreds of times per second.
If the output terminal of a CW coil doesn't have a brake out point, no corona or spark will occur. For anyone who's investigating wireless power transmission or Tesla's version of radio, this is a very helpful feature, since corona only wastes energy.
And if it does have a brake out point, it can create some pretty interesting spark displays, as I mentioned above. An arc to a grounded object increases the current in the arc to such a point that it turns into a white-hot "flaming" discharge.
All-in-all, a CW type coil is a pretty interesting kind to observe. But solid-states can be pretty difficult and annoying to build, and expensive as well. Since solid-state technology obviously was not available to Tesla, he found a different way to operate his coils in CW mode- a generator that was specially designed to produce radio-frequency power. He had originally created it for high-frequency arc lighting.
Today, I have seen absolutely no coils run by a high frequency alternator. Of course, an alternator would be admittedly difficult to build, but since it could probably deliver more power than a solid-state coil, it would be worth it. Does anyone know if there are any companies that still make these alternators? Would anyone be interested in recreating it? Should we even bother?
Thank you for listening. Peace!


The most significant fact of this new century concerning alternator research is the demonstration of the apparent violation of the principle of maximum energy transfer. This can be demonstrated with two sets of Radio Shack's 14 gauge 50 ft spirals of flattened speaker wire, sold in a ready made spiral form for direct use in source frequency resonant research. These adjacent spirals used as windings will have a complete magnetic coupling between them, and using 4 windings a maximum energy transfer resonance may be demonstrated. Here amazingly it is found that a certain amount of coiled wire can be added to the outputs and then series resonated according to the frequency of the alternator and the amount of current obtained in the test is the same as the amount found on a complete short of the source of emf. Essentially then there is a limit found whereby a certain amount of wire resistance may be put on the output and resonated without reducing the supply of amperage from the source. I called this a METR circuit over ten years ago. The amount of resistance to reduce the voltage of the source is found with the outputs shown on the loads whereby the open circuit voltage is dropped to half as predicted with a maximum energy transfer circuit. However the equivalent 50% predicted amount of amperage drop is absent. Complicating these issues is the fact the the 43-45 uf used for the ~2.4 millihenry 1/2 ohm 4 layer Megacable winding set will be slightly resonant to the 465 hz frequency of the source. To make a long story short I was able to pattern 9 four wind sets in a magic square pattern where each phase uses 12 windings. Google "Topological Evidence of Time Distortion in the 666 Machine"


9 years ago

While it's do-able to recreate, I doubt a physical high-frequency alternator would be nearly as cheap and efficient as a solid-state setup.

Unless it was large, it wouldn't be able to deliver as much current as a well-designed freq generator / high-current power amp. Which calls for a large, heavy and complex thing. Especially if the goal is to "out-build" the solid-state driven coils.

Also--high current output has a cost. You'd need to physically spin that alternator with a pretty large motor...(gas or electric.) The greater the current output, the more horsepower required. More complexity and $$$.

If none of that scares you, go for it.

I guess that would explain why you don't see these anymore. But I may still try making one (or something similar) out of old motor parts, like I talked about below, just to see how it turns out.

A high frequency alternator? As in something that alternates current only or produces it aswell, because I could see how one would be able to produce a device that just switches extremely fast out of a motor and the innards of a few motors, where a many contacts are placed in a ring around a number of brushes spaced to be out of synch with the pattern of contacts, though it'd probably be an unreliable device even it was built with extreme care...

It would produce high frequency current - an "alternator" is just another name for an AC generator.

I know what an alternator is but what I was saying is could a similar thing not be done by simply modulating a DC current using some to alternate the current mechanically rather than via solid state electronics... Surely a high frequency alternator could be built carefully from a few old alternators, from what I see the easiest way to raise the frequency of an alternator would be to increase the number of phases in a revolution of the coils, if that makes sense.

Yes, something similar could be done, something like what you suggested before with the motors and brushes might do well. And yes, the thing about the phases does make sense. In fact, if you look at the diagram above, notice that it uses something like 400 phases. Using a few old alternators would provide the simplest rout. The frequency wouldn't be as high as the Tesla alternator, but it may be high enough to do some interesting things.

Well you could find a motor or gear up one to drive it at a higher speed, lowering the number of phase changes needed throughout each revolution to achieve the same frequency, the way I'm looking at it making a high speed switch may actually be more effective, plus with a mechanical one made from a few large motors you could pass much more current than a solid state, allowing for a higher primary to secondary coil ratio... I am wondering about whether a solid state would work out being a better option though, you could even use a speaker driver at say, 19KHZ and some incredibly precise engineering to make a 19KHZ switchover the same way with only two contacts, or sorry four, it depends on whether you'd only like to turn it off and on or alternate the current...