Overunity.com Archives is Temporarily on Read Mode Only!



Free Energy will change the World - Free Energy will stop Climate Change - Free Energy will give us hope
and we will not surrender until free energy will be enabled all over the world, to power planes, cars, ships and trains.
Free energy will help the poor to become independent of needing expensive fuels.
So all in all Free energy will bring far more peace to the world than any other invention has already brought to the world.
Those beautiful words were written by Stefan Hartmann/Owner/Admin at overunity.com
Unfortunately now, Stefan Hartmann is very ill and He needs our help
Stefan wanted that I have all these massive data to get it back online
even being as ill as Stefan is, he transferred all databases and folders
that without his help, this Forum Archives would have never been published here
so, please, as the Webmaster and Creator of these Archives, I am asking that you help him
by making a donation on the Paypal Button above.
You can visit us or register at my main site at:
Overunity Machines Forum



Simple to build isolation transformer that consumes less power than it gives out

Started by Jack Noskills, July 03, 2012, 08:01:10 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.

baroutologos

Quote from: wattsup on July 14, 2012, 08:03:27 AM
@all
Well here is my last trials using a secondary configuration as well. Mind again that these transformers are step down and hence not a true isolation transformer.
...
Enjoy.
wattsup


Hey wattup!

I see you made a nice setup there. Your findings are extraordinary so if i may suggest... verfication, verification and verification again! :)

One thing that bothers me, is the green lamp. If its rated as low as 11w at 110 VAC, how can be 11 watts ate 45 volts DC? From eye and experience playing with bulbs, its seems some 2-3 watts to me...
Pardon me, do not want to be a spoiler here. If this your initial findings is the case, i will be the first to open a champaign bottle to celebrate your success!

happy experimenting!

MileHigh

Mags:

QuoteIf you want me to dig it up in reference to the LED, it clearly shows that you were "adjusting" the led bias voltage(of a red led) to suit you argument.

Two years ago in my mind the forward voltage drop from an ordinary vanilla red LED was 0.7 volts.  That's because it's a diode and a typical diode has a forward voltage drop of about 0.6-0.7 volts.  I mentioned this on a Joule Thief thread and got the crap beaten out of me and I was mocked.  It was about 30 years since the last time I calculated the proper value for a current programming resistor for an LED when you hook it up to a five-volt supply.  So remembering that incident in my mind I thought the forward voltage drop for an ordinary LED was about one volt, not 0.7 volts.  That's how I came up with one volt.

More importantly, it makes no sense to obsess about the specifications of a given part, what's really important is how the part works and is applied in a circuit.  You know that a diode or an ordinary vanilla LED or a modern high-power LED for lighting has a nominal current and a nominal voltage drop.  For diodes, depending on the technology of the diode and the power rating you have different IV curves for different devices.  Same for all the variations of LEDs, they have different IV curves.  So, I don't remember all of the different typical currents and voltage drops for all of the different commonly used diodes and LEDs.  But I know what a diode or LED is, and that's what's more important.  So all of the bashing for forgetting a typical forward voltage drop is uncalled for and gratuitous.

Incidentally, if you (generic 'you') work with diodes and you don't know what an "IV curve" is you should look it up.

QuoteLet me ask you M. In your post, did you mean that P "can" be calculated by VxI? Or even Prms= Vrms x Irms?  Is that what you meant to say? If so, then it doesnt suit your argument, does it.  What were you thinking at the time?  Hmm? What?

What I was thinking is that an RMS voltage already factors in the "square" in order to do power calculations.  That's why you can measure the RMS voltage of any arbitrary voltage waveform across a resistor and deduce the power dissipated in the resistor.  Since Vrms already factors in the "square" I thought that it would be an error to multiply it by Irms because that factors in the "square" also.  So you would be "doubling up on the squares" which would be a mistake.  TheCell corrected me and I did a quick double-check with a simple calculation and realized that I was wrong.  So shoot me!

I was just trying to help Wattsup with his discovery process.  If anyone wants to know what I think of the premise of this thread just post and ask me to tell you.  I will truthfully state what I think and if you don't like what you hear it's your choice to listen to me or ignore me.

MileHigh

Magluvin


T-1000

MileHigh and Magluvin

Wouldn't it be much better just to find two 1:1 transformers and see results yourself instead?

Seriously, this time it is not complex circuit and you already know how to achieve resonance...

Magluvin

Quote from: T-1000 on July 14, 2012, 09:43:35 PM
MileHigh and Magluvin

Wouldn't it be much better just to find two 1:1 transformers and see results yourself instead?

Seriously, this time it is not complex circuit and you already know how to achieve resonance...

T
If you believe that it works, then you need only address MH here.
If you believe it doesnt work, then you need only address me. ;]

I have been doing experiments in this area for quite some time. Transformers with inductors added to the circuit. Just never thought of this configuration. This one is unusual, "and simple"  I like it.  Im happy that those that have taken on the task are seeing some good numbers.

I havnt ordered any transformers yet. I have 2 toroid cores that I am going to try some things, while these guys are doing good.

Mags