Diakoptics, breaking a problem down

  • Topic Is Sticky
  • Last Post 28 February 2020
Chris posted this 16 February 2020

My Friends,

Many of you have heard me talk of Diakoptics.

Diakoptics Definition:


The act of breaking a problem down into components which can be solved independently before being joined back together to obtain a solution to the whole problem.
From the Greek dia (system) + koptic (tear).


Many of you know Gabriel Kron, Tom Bearden talked about Kron being Floyd "Sparky" Sweet's Mentor. Well some history:

In systems analysis, Diakoptics (Greek dia–through + kopto–cut,tear) or the "Method of Tearing" involves breaking a (usually physical) problem down into subproblems which can be solved independently before being joined back together to obtain an exact solution to the whole problem. The term was introduced by Gabriel Kron in a series "Diakoptics — The Piecewise Solution of Large-Scale Systems" published in London, England by The Electrical Journal between June 7, 1957 and February 1959.


Using Diakoptics on Partnered Output Coils:

We are going to make use of Gabriel Kron's Diakoptics to make sense of Partnered Output Coils.


Step One

The Input Coil, work toward a simple Circuit, something like this:


Get the Switching clean and sharp. Make this circuit reliable and trustworthy. Over rate your mosfet so you can turn your input up with no trouble. Make sure you have a super low RDSON.


Step Two

Add one Partnered Output Coil. Make the machine work as a simple Transformer. Standard Electromagnetic Induction from Input to Output should ensure an approximate 80% Efficiency at least.


This is a step up Circuit. The Voltage on the Output should be X Number of Turns increased. Remember, Partnered Output Coils are always more turns than the Input.


Step Three

Partnered Output Coils must oppose each other! This means, one Partnered Output Coil must Assist the Input Coil! One Partnered Output Coil will oppose the input. You see here, adding our third Coil, we have exactly that:


So I urge all Experimentalist's, add the components one at a time. Make sure they all have the desires Polarity and function. This is really important.


Think of this as a Jigsaw Puzzle, in its smallest possible pieces. Add one piece at a time, make that piece do what its supposed to do.

NOTE: An 80% efficiency from Input to Output is standard Transformer Technology! Standard Symmetrical Electromagnetic Induction! Adding another 80% gives us 160% and this is one of the most common figures where most people reach. This sentence has meaning, please understand whats being said here. One Coil assists the Input and must therefore add's another 80% efficiency to the machine on top of the existing 80% efficiency!

Best wishes,


Order By: Standard | Newest | Votes
cd_sharp posted this 17 February 2020

Hey, guys

I consider step 1 done in my setup.

I'm stuck at step 2:

Chris, when you said

The Voltage on the Output should be X Number of Turns increased.

I guess you meant the Vpp at the moment of switching off the input should be X times greater than the input voltage, right?

By the wave form of the input current (light blue) it looks like my primary coil is wrong, it has way too much inductance.

Any thoughts from anyone are welcome.


Chris posted this 17 February 2020

Hi CD,

You are right! I may not have been clear on the Turns thing! I am sorry!

Its true that many Factors play a role here.

But in the Context, as a Transformer, if the Primary has 10 Turns and has 10 Volts applied, then each turn is 1 Volt. This means each turn will have an approximate 1 Turn 1 Volt ratio also. So for 20 turns on the Output Coil in the Transformer we would have approximately 20 Volts.

I found it interesting, Floyd Sweet used a 1.11 form factor equation. So our 1 Volt would be 1 x 1.11 x 20 turns = 22.2 Volts. This accounts for loss and in-efficencies in the Transformer.

Now as Step two is get the transformer working, I have used that Context. We both know a little more how this works. The Two magnetic Fields, from Each Partnered Output Coil have their own Time Rate of Change of their Magnetic Fields and this is at a resonant point, where the Rate at which this happens is determined by the Partnered Output Coil Characteristics themselves.


Don Smiths turns was 16 each Partnered Output Coil. 4 Turns on the Primary. That's a 1 : 4 ratio. For every 1 volt for each turn on the primary, that's 16 Volts on the Secondary.

Floyd Sweet, for every one turn on the Primary ( 48 turns ) to the Secondary ( 240 Turns ) that's a 1 : 5 Ratio.

Akula commonly used a 1 : 3 Ratio but this did vary!

All these combinations is the part where we have to experiment to find the best parameters.

Best wishes,


cd_sharp posted this 18 February 2020

Hey, buddy

Floyd Sweet used a 1.11 form factor equation

This could indicate he didn't use standard transformer laminations core. I know, for example ferrite cores transformers are calculated by other rules and generally have a larger transformation ratio (form factor) at specific frequencies. For 1 volt per turn in the primary there is a greater volts per turn value in the secondary.

Now as Step two is get the transformer working, I have used that Context.

Do you mean you used form factor 1.11 ?

Unlike Don, Akula, Sweet, the non-inductive experiment shows around 1:10 turns ratio. I think it' because of the low voltage at the input, right?

Please correct me if I'm wrong! I would not be upset at all. On the contrary as I tend to over-complicate stuff and overlook simple things.

  • Liked by
  • Jagau
Chris posted this 18 February 2020

Hey CD,

Yes, Floyd Sweet drew a diagram: in the original folder: Sparky Visit


Unfortunately I was not able to verify this. But I am confident some of this is Floyd's hand writing.

No I have not incorporated the 1.11 in my work. Not yet. I aim for best Output.

Many times Floyd mentioned Faraday's Laws.


  • Liked by
  • cd_sharp
  • YoElMiCrO
cd_sharp posted this 18 February 2020

Hey, man,

Yes, I remember I went over these pages, but I understood very little.

Here, I found the solution to step 2:

It's been a long chase.

Good day/night, friends!

Chris posted this 18 February 2020

Hey CD,

Very nice! Well done!

Much of whats on the above Floyd Sweet Documents is non-sense. But we can take what makes sense and can be verified and learn from that.

Nice work my Friend!


Chris posted this 19 February 2020


In Step 2, something you said, in the Video Title, that made me think that it may be worth looking into this a little more.



Voltage is the Time Rate of Change of Current.

While the Input Coil Current changes in Time, the Output Coil Voltage changes in Time! When the Input Coil Current is steady, the Output Voltage is Steady, no change in Voltage. The relationship is:

diInput ≅ dVOutput


Changing the Input Current Changes the Output Voltage.


Current flows due to Opposite Magnetomotive Force.

If the Input Coil has a steady Current, the Output Coil Current is Steady. Instantly switch off the Input Coil Current, the Output Coil Current instantly switched off. The relationship is:

diInput ≅ diOutput


Changing the input Current Changes the Output Current.


  • d = Delta, often seen as: δ or Δ the Change
  • i = the Current.
  • V = the Voltage.
  • = Approximately Equal to.
  • Input = the Coil, Primary.
  • Output = the Coil, Secondary.


Its all about the Change! What happens when something Changes!

I am specifying the Force to Force relationship. I am not saying the measured Value! The Values are not the same, E.M.F vs M.M.F... So, if you see, the relationships I am pointing out, this will help immensely in the understanding and the replication process of Step 2!

That's why, when you say: "Great duty allows great voltage" there appears to be more Voltage because more Input Current is Changing in Time, and then the Output Current is Supported for Longer the the Input Current. More Current In and therefore more Current Out! Does this make any sense?

Have I explained this with a decent description?

Best wishes my friend,


cd_sharp posted this 19 February 2020

Hey, Chris

Let me zoom in on that moment. I also add the output current ( pink ).

What happens when something Changes!

Something else reacts, we get a reaction, equal and opposite generally, a force that counter balances the change.

Does this make any sense?


I'll think about it, how to make it work as a transformer with at least 80% efficiency, but keep the voltage Vpp = 34V.


Chris posted this 19 February 2020

Hey CD,

Step 3 is how to redirect these effects, the effects in Step 2.

Redirect the Effects so each Partnered Output Coil have the same Interactions, the same effects. The Input Coil is the excitation coil for these effects.


Best wishes,


cd_sharp posted this 27 February 2020

Hey, guys

The latest update

Still going for it when I find a little time.


  • Liked by
  • YoElMiCrO
  • Chris
Chris posted this 27 February 2020

Hey CD,

Good work! I left this message on your video:

+1 - Good work CD. Observing the Output, when a Frequency and Duty Cycle combination is found, your Output will peak, go to maximum. So viewing your output will also help. The Voltage gained on the Output is important, as the Coils slap together, this "Generates" a Voltage. Remember our Delayed Conduction Techniques. The greater the Voltage the greater the Current because I = V / R, Ohms Law. If the Partnered Output Coils have too much Impedance, AC Resistance, Resistance to Change of the Magnetic Field, this can also be a problem.


Of course, we all know, maximising the Output for the least Input is our overall goal. Observing the Output, finding what direction what changes made, will show a pattern. If you follow the pattern, what the Partnered Output Coils like to see, then its only a matter of time before you find the right configuration.

Best wishes,



P.S: in Low Frequency situations, < 7Khz or so, the maximum Noise will be heard.

cd_sharp posted this 28 February 2020

Hey, guys

Moving on, I reduced the POCs to 200 turns each. Here is a new interesting experiment:

Best wishes

Members Online:
Since Nov 27 2018
Your Support:

More than anything else, your contributions to this forum are most important! We are trying to actively get all visitors involved, but we do only have a few main contributors, which are very much appreciated! If you would like to see more pages with more detailed experiments and answers, perhaps a contribution of another type maybe possible:

Donate (PayPal)

The content I am sharing is not only unique, but is changing the world as we know it! Please Support Us!

Donate (Patreon)

Thank You So Much!

Weeks High Earners:
The great Nikola Tesla:

Ere many generations pass, our machinery will be driven by a power obtainable at any point of the universe. This idea is not novel. Men have been led to it long ago go by instinct or reason. It has been expressed in many ways, and in many places, in the history of old and new. We find it in the delightful myth of Antheus, who drives power from the earth; we find it among the subtle speculations of one of your splendid mathematicians, and in many hints and statements of thinkers of the present time. Throughout space there is energy. Is this energy static or kinetic? If static, our hopes are in vain; if kinetic - and this we know it is for certain - then it is a mere question of time when men will succeed in attaching their machinery to the very wheelwork of nature.

Experiments With Alternate Currents Of High Potential And High Frequency (February 1892).