Quantum Energy Generator (QEG) Open Sourced (by HopeGirl)

[MileHigh]

F_Brown,

After some reflecting on the phasing dots this morning I realized that if the coils were arranged in bucking configuration, then when the rotor is in between poles, the coils will cancel out, and when the rotor is aligned with a pole, the flux will then flow though the rotor, allowing the magnetic field in each half of the stator as divided by the rotor to flow in opposite directions.

Yes I looked at that today and came to the same preliminary conclusion.  Notice if you change the dot polarity then you are adding when the rotor is not aligned and then when the rotor is aligned there is flux cancellation in the spinning rotor itself.

To be honest either way you have a transient AC short alternating with normal flux addition.  However, the key thing to keep in mind is that it's the "swipe by" of the rotor that is the key.  You have to be looking at the time-variant aspects because magnetics only work with changes with respect to time.  I can only assume that when you have a "swipe by" event that the rotor experiences Lenz drag.  In fact by definition it has to experience Lenz drag if it is going to pump energy into the LC resonator.

I am not going to push the analysis any further on my end but I welcome you guys to continue on your exploration.  The real way to figure out what is going on would be to actually have the device.

Here is were there is a big problem:

http://be-do.com/index.php/en/forum/index

It appears that on the main forum for the QEG it's 95% excited people that don't have a clue about electronics and magnetics.  The other 5% aren't particularly strong in the subject matter themselves.  I am certainly not an expert myself, but just by reading what's going on there, it's more New Age people than electronics people.  So there is barely a serious technical discussion going on on the main QEG forum.

One can only hope that some of the "be-do" people are also lurking here and trying to pick up on some of the discussion by osmosis.  Hopefully they will get a sense that it's not all roses in the purported future QEG free energy paradise that they are all dreaming of (to the tune of at least $100K USD).

The sad thing is that these "subversive discussions" are probably only "secretly whispered" on "be-do."  The ironic thing is that many "open minded" people are actually living in their own form of fear and intimidation and thoughtcrime.  For example, I read somewhere than on some generic "New Age" web site that is promoting the QEG, any negative posting questioning the QEG is nearly instantly deleted by the person that "watches over" the New Age forum.

So my feeling is that right now there is a lot of repressed "negative energy" that will eventually have to come out and people will start asking serious questions like, "Okay, we have been waiting for two months now, please show us proof that it works."

So I think that this thread has been a positive contribution so far with respect to the real truth.  That's what's important, uncovering the real truth whether it be good or bad.  For those with a decent technical background and a lot of experience watching these types of free energy propositions, the "optics" for this one are just about as bad as they can possibly get.  It's only a matter of time before the "newly discovered free energy flower children" start to wake up and smell the true roses.

MileHigh

[MileHigh]

For reference, here is as close as it gets at this point on the "be-do" forum:

http://be-do.com/index.php/en/forum/qeg-general-topics/272-how-or-why-does-the-qeg-work

First posting by newbie DrTube:  "TOPIC: How or Why does the QEG work?"

Hello everybody,
I've been extensively studying the QEG User Manual and reading the Tesla Patent (511.916). Has anyone else actually read this patent? I don't understand how the QEG achieves its over unity effect (or COP>1 performance). This specific Tesla patent only describes a resonant transformer type of generator with a to-and-fro moving core which "someone" (James? WITTS?) has cleverly transformed into a rotational device. Good thinking! But there is no COP>1 performance here yet.

I think that the exciter coil is a crucial part for the COP>1 performance (though I can't see one in the WITTS videos). Now the QEG user manual states:
In the QEG, the exciter coil is used to provide a conduction path through the quantum field (zero point) into the generator core. This has the effect of polarizing the core, which increases power output over time.
This doesn't clarify anything to me. I understand clearly that the "classic" Maxwell-Heaviside-Lorentz EM theory is so heavily curtailed that it is incapable of accurately describing what's happening here. I suspect that the vector potential (A) and/or the scalar potential (Phi) generated by the exciter coil plays an important role here.

Who can shine some light on this important matter?

Response by veteran Larry:

A thorough understanding of the topics you discuss in regards to how the QEG actually works is still being worked on! There are plenty of theories, with many of them being discussed on this forum, but until the machine is replicated, and all of the details figured out, I don't think anyone will have solid answers to your questions. Once there are multiple working copies of the generator we will have scientific and engineering types providing all of the measurements and theories based on actual observations that everyone has been clamoring for. Remember, the QEG is still in its infancy and will take some time to mature. There were some audio recordings posted today by Shean in which the developer of the QEG discusses various details of its operation that you may want to give a listen to.

Best Regards,

Larry

Quantum schmauntum.  Once there are m u l t i p l e   w  o  r  k  i  n  g      c    o    p    i    e    s.......

So there you have it.  HopeGirl asks for donations to run around the world and "teach" people how to make their own QEG so that they can pump power back into the grid!!!  Please just believe it works!  Just believe!!!!

I would say believe if you want to but don't spend one red cent until you get real proof that it does work..........

MileHigh

[F_Brown]

I wouldn't think they wanted the rotor to saturate like that, particularly since it should be running at much higher power levels, more like these shots if you go by what they're saying.

They're saying 24,000 volts on that primary, I don't even see how that is possible, could only be peek and very very briefly.

My model shows 50 amps dc is 1800 volts and 45k watts, you can't get much more than about 11 amps through a 20 awg winding without burning it up. http://www.powerstream.com/Wire_Size.htm These shots show 50 amps going through, it is so saturated nothing even goes through the rotor and there would be zero output on the secondary as a result of the rotor turning.

But if we clean this up with an appropriately sized rotor this might be a very interesting generator, because it seems quite possible to time the pulsing of the entire system such that there is very little lenz drag on the rotor.

DC Will pump more current though the windings than AC will.  At 400 Hz my simple tank model was showing about 650mA when the peak voltage on the primary was about 25kV.  Can you run your sim at 400 Hz and a peak current of 650mA and see what happens?

The new images seem to show aiding configuration of windings rather than bucking.  Did you change that or is that a result of the higher current?

[shinz62]

DC Will pump more current though the windings than AC will.  At 400 Hz my simple tank model was showing about 650mA when the peak voltage on the primary was about 25kV.  Can you run your sim at 400 Hz and a peak current of 650mA and see what happens?

The new images seem to show aiding configuration of windings rather than bucking.  Did you change that or is that a result of the higher current?

I did change it to aiding, oops.

I'm also working on an updated model with a double wide rotor, but it doesn't scale nicely. A fat rotor doesn't really fit good, major changes will be necessary.

I accidentally overwrote the model with the rotor gap specified by the blueprint, this has no gap in the rotor, so it is close but not exactly like it. I'll repair it later and try again, if it is significantly different I will re-post the results.

It took 20-25 minutes to compute each run but here are the results in one orientation aligned, bucking, 400hz:

Primary:
Total current = 0.65 Amps
Voltage Drop = 4300.45+I*60259.5 Volts
Flux Linkage = 23.9765-I*1.7016 Webers
Flux/Current = 36.8869-I*2.61785 Henries
Voltage/Current = 6616.08+I*92707 Ohms
Real Power = 1397.65 Watts
Reactive Power = 19584.4 VAr
Apparent Power = 19634.2 VA

Secondary shows:it
Total current = 0 Amps
Voltage Drop = -479.15-I*6091.01 Volts
Flux Linkage = -2.42354+I*0.190648 Webers
Real Power = -0 Watts
Reactive Power = 0 VAr
Apparent Power = 0 VA


I guess 4.3k volts + 60k imaginary could come out to the 24K volts in the primary they say they're getting. This is very interesting, it shows that it takes ~1400 watt to generate nearly 20KVA! that is great! The secondary should have that available  part of the time as the rotor spins, so they could be correct about the 10K, if your talking VA, but that is NOT watts...hard to say how many watts that is.

Nearly 500 volts in the secondary.

I am convinced it would work better with rotor 2x wider.

Here is the numbers from the lower model with the 2x wide rotor at 400hz:

Primary:
Total current = 0.65 Amps
Voltage Drop = 9197.42+I*102845 Volts
Flux Linkage = 40.9206-I*3.65005 Webers
Flux/Current = 62.9547-I*5.61546 Henries
Voltage/Current = 14149.9+I*158222 Ohms
Real Power = 2989.16 Watts
Reactive Power = 33424.5 VAr
Apparent Power = 33557.9 VA

Secondary:
Total current = 0 Amps
Voltage Drop = -1040.79-I*10900.3 Volts
Flux Linkage = -4.33707+I*0.414118 Webers
Real Power = -0 Watts
Reactive Power = 0 VAr
Apparent Power = 0 VA

Wow doubles the output.

[gotoluc]

The below was posted by Peter Lindemann at the Energetic forum

Hey Folks,

Here is an email I have sent to a number of people asking me about the QEG.

Thank you for your email.  The QEG plans show a simple, switched reluctance generator powered by an external electric motor. (page 7)  This has nothing to do with Tesla!!!  This exact design was first proposed by John Ecklin in 1979.  I was a member of a group of researchers in Santa Barbara who built and tested many variations of this class of generator through the 1980s.  These machines are generally called "switched reluctance generators" or more correctly "variable inductance generators."

If you put a capacitor in series with the input, as shown, the unit will "self-excite" if there is a slight amount of magnetism in the rotor or stator material.  There are specific speeds where the electrical output power goes up due to the resonance event, but during these episodes, the requirement of mechanical energy input goes up as well. If you just meter the voltage and the amperage, it looks really good, but it's mostly reactive power as the volts and amps are out of phase.

If the output removes magnetic energy from the core, then there is less to circulate in the resonant tank (LC circuit) created by the input coils and the capacitor bank.  The system has a specific number of joules of energy (real power) circulating in the magnetic core and any real energy removed is produced by the reversal of the field in the output coils by the rotor shifting position.  Rotation of the rotor produces the mechanical shifting of the magnetic fields and reinforces the currents oscillating in the input coils.  One of the patent filings I produced back then was titled "Mechanical Rotary Transformer" and covered a design similar to this in many ways.  The best tests we produced with our prototypes had a COP = 1.2 (120% efficient).  The people involved in the Santa Barbara group included myself, Mike Knox, Bruce DePalma, Chris Carson, and later Eric Dollard.  In a parallel development, John Bedini duplicated much of the same series of experiments and concluded the same thing!  The best the machines could do was about 120%.  All of this happened before the internet, and since the experimental results were disappointing, no final report was ever produced.

Knowing what I know about this class of machine, I do not believe anyone is going to build one of these in their backyard and power their home with it.  We spent over $30k building and $50k testing prototypes of these machines between 1981 and 1987.  This is not going to go where you think it is going.

I stand by what I said in the newsletter.  An "open source" project based on these ideas will not go anywhere.  In fact, this was all "open sourced" in the 1980s by John Ecklin.  Look here at these links, taken from the archive at Rex Research:  John W Ecklin -- Stationary armature generator -- US Patent 3879633, US Patent 4567407, 12 articles
and here:
http://www.rexresearch.com/ecklin/ecklin1.jpg
http://www.rexresearch.com/ecklin/ecklin8.jpg

In the image of the article "ecklin1", John Ecklin is suggesting 400% efficiency was possible, but it never was experimentally demonstrated. In the image of the article "ecklin8", the design of the machine on the left shows the same structure as the one in the QEG plans.  The drawing on the right is from my patent filing, first reported on by Paul Brown in 1981.  Both Paul and I knew John Ecklin.

Sorry, but I am trying to help people understand that this has been looked at, in depth, over 30 years ago, and it doesn't work well enough to produce a self-running machine.

I have no knowledge of the "Fix the World" group or their motives for putting these plans together, but it is my belief that this sort of machine is not perfected yet, and should not be "open sourced" to a community of enthusiastic people who do not have the machine shop skills or the sophisticated electrical engineering and mathematical background to understand the significant subtleties of a variable inductance machine.

That about covers it!

Best regards,
Peter __________________
Peter Lindemann, D.Sc.