Post by thread:[EE]:: Intercoupled Maegentrons allow domestic ove

Got to keep them off balance ... A rather good idea if it works. Cross coupling energy from the outputs of adjacent magnetrons allows very large arrays thereof (100+) to be phase synchronised thereby allowing coherent output for eg "energy weapon systems". Patent: http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PG01&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=%2220060208672%22.PGNR.&OS=DN/20060208672&RS=DN/20060208672 New Scientist reference: http://www.newscientisttech.com/article/dn10356?DCMP=NLC-nletter&nsref=dn10356 The provided redundancy and low unit cost due to existing economies of scale may make this method attractive for other applications. Perhaps. Quick skim of patent application makes it clear that they are very firmly standing on the shoulders of others who have already claimed to have achieved similar things. Also: IPOD wake up on finger. Aircraft nitrogen fuel tank passivation / pressurisation using (much filtered) engine exhaust. Russell.. .

> A rather good idea if it works. > Cross coupling energy from the outputs of adjacent magnetrons allows > very large arrays thereof (100+) to be phase synchronised thereby > allowing coherent output for eg "energy weapon systems". A DIY urban defense system? Or a fry-the-next-neigborhood project? Wouter van Ooijen -- ------------------------------------------- Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl consultancy, development, PICmicro products docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu

On 10/26/06, David VanHorn <.....dvanhornKILLspam@spam@microbrix.com> wrote: > I'm constantly amazed at what the patent office thinks is "not obvious to > the skilled practitioner". High power RF has been done this way since > forever. I have doubts it will work so easily. BTW do you see the pictures from this patent? Any magnetron pumped like this is susceptible to fast overheating. One simple example: turn on an empty microwave oven. Because of reflections inside the heating chamber the thermal protection from the magnetron will be OFF in less than 3-4 minutes (100% continous power). Pumping into a magnetron cavity only a small part from microwave energy from other magnetron is not an easy job. When you must do it in both direction is much complicated. Where are drawings ? :) Vasile

On 10/27/06, Vasile Surducan <piclist9KILLspamgmail.com> wrote: > On 10/26/06, David VanHorn <.....dvanhornKILLspam.....microbrix.com> wrote: > > I'm constantly amazed at what the patent office thinks is "not obvious to > > the skilled practitioner". High power RF has been done this way since > > forever. > > I have doubts it will work so easily. BTW do you see the pictures > from this patent? > Any magnetron pumped like this is susceptible to fast overheating. > One simple example: turn on an empty microwave oven. > Because of reflections inside the heating chamber the thermal > protection from the magnetron will be OFF in less than 3-4 minutes > (100% continous power). > Pumping into a magnetron cavity only a small part from microwave > energy from other magnetron is not an easy job. When you must do it in > both direction is much complicated. > > Where are drawings ? ok , I see them after tiff plugins installed

Vasile Surducan wrote: > One simple example: turn on an empty microwave oven. > Because of reflections inside the heating chamber the thermal > protection from the magnetron will be OFF in less than 3-4 minutes > (100% continous power). One thing I've always wondered. Pretty much every microwave instruction says not to put metal into the oven -- yet the whole oven is made of metal. I know that of course metal reflects rather than absorbs, but it shouldn't do any harm (at least not as long as there is enough other material in the oven). Or am I missing something? Gerhard

Gerhard Fiedler wrote: > One thing I've always wondered. Pretty much every microwave instruction > says not to put metal into the oven -- yet the whole oven is made of metal. > I know that of course metal reflects rather than absorbs, but it shouldn't > do any harm (at least not as long as there is enough other material in the > oven). Or am I missing something? > > Gerhard > My oven instructions stated "to prevent overcooking of food (ends of chicken drumsticks, etc) cover them with foil to shield them". I also have put in large metal bowls with no small antenna-like projections with absolutely no problems. YMMV...

On 10/27/06, Gerhard Fiedler <EraseMElistsspam_OUTTakeThisOuTconnectionbrazil.com> wrote: > Vasile Surducan wrote: > > > One simple example: turn on an empty microwave oven. > > Because of reflections inside the heating chamber the thermal > > protection from the magnetron will be OFF in less than 3-4 minutes > > (100% continous power). > > One thing I've always wondered. Pretty much every microwave instruction > says not to put metal into the oven -- yet the whole oven is made of metal. > I know that of course metal reflects rather than absorbs, but it shouldn't > do any harm (at least not as long as there is enough other material in the > oven). Or am I missing something? Absorbed waves into high dielectric loses material = heating, only small refelections goes back to the magnetron (which is designed to work with large VSWR) Stationary waves into an empty cavity = huge reflections heating the magnetron. A piece of metal (with considerable dimension compared with wavelenght ) will modify the microwave cavity (aka oven). If you're lucky (and the oven has a good microwave spreading system) the piece will be from time to time in the maximum electric filed, producing sparks. The plasma around sparks acts as a variable and uncontrolled load. The VSWR will be modified dramatically with every discharge and finally the thermal protection will stop the magnetron's supply. That's all which usually is happening. Vasile

> > One simple example: turn on an empty microwave oven. > > Because of reflections inside the heating chamber the thermal > > protection from the magnetron will be OFF in less than 3-4 minutes > > (100% continous power). > > One thing I've always wondered. Pretty much every microwave > instruction says not to put metal into the oven -- yet the > whole oven is made of metal. > I know that of course metal reflects rather than absorbs, but > it shouldn't do any harm (at least not as long as there is > enough other material in the oven). Or am I missing something? > > Gerhard If you put a spoon or fork in there it'll get hot after a few minutes. That's about it. Very thin metal (like in CDs) will get vaporised. Something like aluminium foil won't, in fact some books say you can partly defrost something by wrapping the bit you don't want defrosted in the foil. Two bits of metal close together may produce arcs, as will foil crumpled up. Or it may just sit there getting hot. Something metallic that comes close to the oven wall may arc too. There are a few people trying to melt metal (like aluminium or silver) in microwave ovens. The focus seems to be to make a ceramic crucible that gets hot enough for the melting to happen. Most microwave have a couple of thermal cut-outs. One is usually near the magnetron itself, the other above the oven somewhere at the other end. Tip: don't test these by pointing a blow torch at them. They go 'ping' and don't really work after that. Done it exactly once :) Curing wood is something that's been done for a while. A burning match or candle is interesting. Tony

On 10/27/06, Marcel duchamp <marcel.duchampspam_OUTsbcglobal.net> wrote: > Gerhard Fiedler wrote: > > One thing I've always wondered. Pretty much every microwave instruction > > says not to put metal into the oven -- yet the whole oven is made of metal. > > I know that of course metal reflects rather than absorbs, but it shouldn't > > do any harm (at least not as long as there is enough other material in the > > oven). Or am I missing something? > > > > Gerhard > > > > My oven instructions stated "to prevent overcooking of food (ends of > chicken drumsticks, etc) cover them with foil to shield them". > > I also have put in large metal bowls with no small antenna-like > projections with absolutely no problems. Because you already have a high dielectric loss load (the chicken). Put only the aluminium foil and watch what is happening. Vasile

{Quote hidden}> > > One thing I've always wondered. Pretty much every microwave > > > instruction says not to put metal into the oven -- yet > the whole oven is made of metal. > > > I know that of course metal reflects rather than absorbs, but it > > > shouldn't do any harm (at least not as long as there is > enough other > > > material in the oven). Or am I missing something? > > > > > > Gerhard > > > > > > > My oven instructions stated "to prevent overcooking of food > (ends of > > chicken drumsticks, etc) cover them with foil to shield them". > > > > I also have put in large metal bowls with no small antenna-like > > projections with absolutely no problems. > > Because you already have a high dielectric loss load (the chicken). > Put only the aluminium foil and watch what is happening. It depends on the shape of the foil as well. You get arcing at pointy bits, so a long strip like a thin triangle will arc more easily than a circle. The points act like antennas I guess. Light bulbs are good fun too, but they tend to blow up after 10 seconds or so, so cover them with a clear jug or something. Makes cleanup easier. Tony

> If you put a spoon or fork in there it'll get hot after a few minutes. > That's about it. Very thin metal (like in CDs) will get vaporised. > Something like aluminium foil won't, in fact some books say you can partly > defrost something by wrapping the bit you don't want defrosted in the foil. The same thing when you have a ceramic mug that painted with lead based paint the mug will be heated up while the content remains cool. On 27/10/06, Tony Smith <@spam@ajsmithKILLspamrivernet.com.au> wrote: {Quote hidden}> > > > One simple example: turn on an empty microwave oven. > > > Because of reflections inside the heating chamber the thermal > > > protection from the magnetron will be OFF in less than 3-4 minutes > > > (100% continous power). > > > > One thing I've always wondered. Pretty much every microwave > > instruction says not to put metal into the oven -- yet the > > whole oven is made of metal. > > I know that of course metal reflects rather than absorbs, but > > it shouldn't do any harm (at least not as long as there is > > enough other material in the oven). Or am I missing something? > > > > Gerhard > > > If you put a spoon or fork in there it'll get hot after a few minutes. > That's about it. Very thin metal (like in CDs) will get vaporised. > Something like aluminium foil won't, in fact some books say you can partly > defrost something by wrapping the bit you don't want defrosted in the > foil. > > Two bits of metal close together may produce arcs, as will foil crumpled > up. > Or it may just sit there getting hot. Something metallic that comes close > to the oven wall may arc too. > > There are a few people trying to melt metal (like aluminium or silver) in > microwave ovens. The focus seems to be to make a ceramic crucible that > gets > hot enough for the melting to happen. > > Most microwave have a couple of thermal cut-outs. One is usually near the > magnetron itself, the other above the oven somewhere at the other > end. Tip: > don't test these by pointing a blow torch at them. They go 'ping' and > don't > really work after that. Done it exactly once :) > > Curing wood is something that's been done for a while. A burning match or > candle is interesting. > > Tony > > -

On 11/20/06, M Graff <KILLspamexplorer-piclistKILLspamflame.org> wrote: > David VanHorn wrote: > > I'm constantly amazed at what the patent office thinks is "not obvious to > > the skilled practitioner". High power RF has been done this way since > > forever. > > The US patent office has stated that they aren't even looking at > patents, as the person who patented the patent process has shown. > > They are relying upon the courts to defend -- and vet -- patents now. > At most they do a simple keyword search. Do you have a source for that? Bill -- Psst... Hey, you... Buddy... Want a kitten? straycatblues.petfinder.org

William Couture wrote: >> They are relying upon the courts to defend -- and vet -- patents now. >> At most they do a simple keyword search. > > Do you have a source for that? Not in so many words, of course. Former workers have complained that they are evaluated not on the quality of job, but the rate of output. That the amount of searching to compare to previous patents or existing works is downplayed, and there is no required level of actual searching work needed. In fact, if a PTO worker choose to use "google" as their only source, they can't even do that, since for most of them the raw, unfiltered internet is blocked. --Michael

Which is a really, really rubbish way to do patent law. I suppose it does in a way comply with the pure capitalist basis of the US though, in that under such a system the big guy always wins irrespective of the merits of their position. On 11/20/06, M Graff <RemoveMEexplorer-piclistTakeThisOuTflame.org> wrote: {Quote hidden}> > David VanHorn wrote: > > I'm constantly amazed at what the patent office thinks is "not obvious > to > > the skilled practitioner". High power RF has been done this way since > > forever. > > The US patent office has stated that they aren't even looking at > patents, as the person who patented the patent process has shown. > > They are relying upon the courts to defend -- and vet -- patents now. > At most they do a simple keyword search. > > --Michael > > -