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

[F_Brown]

All,

Since it has been a bit quiet on the technical front, I did some more simulations and have made a graph of the locking process of the rotor when the system gets into resonance, see the attached picture.

In this case, the rotor is spun up to about 50Hz (3000rpm, or angular velocity S=50*2*pi=314 rad/sec). When the electrical resonance builds up sufficiently, you can see the stator starting to act on the rotor. In this particular depicted case, the torque between the stator and rotor will cause the rotor to start slowing down and locking into the electrical resonance frequency of about 84Hz (equivalent angular velocity is half of the electrical resonance and is S=42*2*pi=264 rad/s).

Electrical resonance frequency is f = 1/(2*pi*sqrt(L*C)) and should be ideally 100Hz for a rotor spinning at 50Hz, but in this simulation, the actual electrical resonance is at 84Hz and the system is able to pull the mechanical rotation speed into sync with the 84Hz electrical resonance by exerting a negative torque on the rotor and slowing the rotor down until it locks into the electrical resonance.

This locking effect is described by Tesla in his 511,916 patent (that patent IS mentioned in the QEG documents). But that's all this patent is about.... nothing else.....

I thought it was interesting that I am able to reproduce this locking effect with my simulations.


PmgR
================================================
Help stop the persecution of Falun Dafa in China!
Stop organ harvesting from living people in China's labor camps
http://www.faluninfo.net
================================================
Falun Dafa, also known as Falun Gong, is an ancient Chinese
self-cultivation practice, based on the principles of
* Truthfulness * Compassion * Tolerance *
Great for improvement of health and mental well-being!
http://www.falundafa.org
================================================

Hey Roger,

Can you increase the input power, and see what happens?

Are you including the moments of inertia for both the motor and the rotor?

Maybe the dip in the waveform that my model lacks might be due to inertial interaction with the electrical/magnetic forces in the generator.

[F_Brown]

All
Do you know this  QEG simulation:

http://www.allmystery.de/themen/gw110428-17

Here an output of Pspice:
http://static.allmystery.de/upics/83e7c2_QEG_Sim_2014-06-25_Overlay.jpg
@+

It's interesting that he is also getting the dip.  Here is a translation of the page from Google:

***

Translate   Due to the oddities that have emerged in the analysis of QEG primary resonant circuit, I'm all for more complex simulations than they are practicable possible with Excel, switched to the circuit simulation program LTspice. LTspice can here (for Windows, WINE, and Mac) free download: http://www.linear.com/designtools/software/. Provided that the existing ambiguities can be clarified satisfactorily, I would, however, still also create an Excel simulation, as they mE is accessible to more people.

This is the LTspice circuit that I designed for the simulation of QEG primary resonant circuit:

The voltage source Vinit far left is used to charge the capacitor C1 to a defined starting voltage. The two timer TSW1 and TSW2 provide top left a timed Y switcher Represent are - a more elegant way we do not seem to be in LTspice - imaged by formulaic controlled resistors that after a set period (1 microsecond), their resistance of 1 nOhm ("on") on 1 Gohms ("off") change, and vice versa. First TSW1 and TSW2 a turned off, whereby the capacitor C1 is connected to the power source Vinit and is separated from the resonant circuit. After the period is TSW1 turns off and a TSW2, which separated from C1 Vinit, and is connected to the resonant circuit.

The somewhat peculiar construct in the dashed rectangle in the right half of the circuit is a variable inductance. Between the inductance VLX VLY and is controlled by the voltage LCtrl, where 1 volt corresponds to an inductance of 1 LCtrl Henry. I have taken the concept of the variable inductance of the following paper, in which you will also find a detailed derivation of this: Energy Accumulation in Waves Travelling through a Checkerboard Dielectric Material Structure in Space-time (p. 26 ff.)

Although the LTspice Standard inductance also allows a modeling of inductance, but only in an indirect way. You can specify an expression for the flux, which for example may be represent a magnetic saturation depends on the current flow can be (which indirectly corresponds to an inductance). For a variable inductance in the form as it is used here, this method seems however to be not suitable.

Besides the two main elements capacitor and inductor are in the resonant circuit nor a series load resistor RSeR and a parallel load resistance Rpar. RSeR also has the task of imaging the ohmic resistance of the inductor.

The "monster" formula at the bottom of the circuit used to control the Induktivitätsverlaufs. I had this controller first with a generated in Excel PWL file (PWL = piecewise linear = piecewise linear, ie, the curve is composed of short linear sections) realized, but this was quite impractical, since each parameter change required quite a few steps. Finally, it is, however, I managed to gather all the necessary elements in a closed formula.

The basis of the Induktivitätsverlaufs is a normal sine wave (specifically an inverted cosine oscillation, so that the course starts at a minimum). The. Param row below the circuit contains the appropriate control parameters. Lmin is the Induktivitätsminimum, Lmax at the Induktivitätsmaximum. Lfreq is the target frequency of the resonant circuit, where (important!) the frequency of the inductance is exactly twice as high. Lhold indicates a percentage (0 to 1), while the inductor is maintained at each half-wave (at the beginning or end of the total vibration) is at its minimum. This corresponds to my theory described herein, that the inductance of the primary coil QEG probably remains in the movement of the rotor between the stator poles near its minimum. Lhold = 0 corresponds to a normal sine oscillation. Lexp indicates an additional potentiation, which is applied to the pure harmonic component (without offset). Values​​> 1 (eg, 2 = square) lead to a narrower curve, values ​​<1 (eg 0.5 = square root) to a wider curve compared to a normal sine wave (Lexp = 1).

A few examples:

In the simulation, the voltage curve is green and the power curve blue, while the superposed QEG-oscilloscope measurement the voltage curve yellow, and the power curve is turquoise. The gray curve represents the (enlarged) the course of the inductance dar. Considering the deliberate vertical displacement of the superimposed QEG-oscilloscope measurement by half a small tick (as explained here) are in the scale height of the simulation and the oscilloscope's almost exactly the same. For the curve of Induktivitätsverlaufs the combination has = 0.35 and = 0.5 Lexp experimentally proven from Lhold as well suited to the - recreate "Batman" waveform of the oscilloscope measurement of the real QEG - as I call it;) . RSeR is set to the estimated ohmic resistance of the primary coils QEG of 50 ohms, Rpar an experimentally determined value of 252 ohms representing the load (light bulb) to the secondary coil QEG.

Also, the simulation of Asterix's resonant generator (based on the same principle as the QEG, but was designed completely independent of a few years ago of Asterix) gives a good agreement with the real experiment (but again, only with a much higher set Induktivitätsmaximum, instead of 350 mH in the range around 900 mH):


In the simulation again, the voltage curve and the current curve is green blue, while the superimposed real oscilloscope measurement apparatus, the voltage curve red, and the power curve is yellow. The gray curve represents the (enlarged) History of the inductor represents the scale height of the simulation and the oscilloscope agree almost exactly the same. The curve of the Induktivitätsverlaufs is here, as measured by Asterix, a normal sine curve (Asterix's apparatus is significantly different in this respect from QEG). RSeR is set to the specified Asterix 11 ohms (10 ohms + 1 ohm) (the ohmic resistance of the coil is likely to be negligible in this apparatus), Rpar is disabled (1 Gohms).

Since I can not post attachments here, follow the LTspice code of the circuit and the plot-definition file in a separate post.Google Translate for Business:Translator ToolkitWebsite TranslatorGlobal Market Finder Turn off instant translationAbout Google TranslateMobilePrivacyHelp Click to edit and see alternate translations

[Shanti]

BTW, the main thread is on the german forum http://www.energiederzukunft.org/forum/5-allgemeines-forum/2988-quantum-energy-generator?start=198#6862

But this user also posts in the allmystery forum, you mentioned. But on the main forum is also the user Asterix, which replicated a QEG (not 1:1) and made measurements, and together they are now simulating it...
So all interested might take sometimes take a short look into that german thread...

[MileHigh]

I finally came up with another test.

Let's keep the numbers simple and assume this:

600 watts electrical-in to power the motor.
Assume the motor outputs 500 watts of mechanical power that is transferred into the rotor.
Assume that 100 watts go into the light bulb load.

So what happens to the "missing" 400 watts?  Nobody has discussed this seriously.

The fantasy is that the "tuning" of the QEG that is already operating in resonance will make the "magic jump" from -400 watts to +10,000 watts.  They are probably thinking of changing the capacitance values and moving up and down in the resonance frequency as one way to look for the "magic jump."  That certainly will not happen.  You will recall that James already tried something like this with no results.  I can't think off-hand of what other "tuning" they could do.

So let's come back to Earth and discuss the "missing" 400 watts.

The vast majority of the missing power is probably being burnt off in the coil windings.  They are resistors at the same time, something that you always have to be conscious of.  As the rotor turns and it is between poles, there is a sequence when there is current flowing between both primaries and they are in flux-self cancellation mode.  In my opinion this is the ridiculous flaw in the design.  As the rotor turns through a full cycle, there are certain rotor angles where the two primaries are in a magnetic short circuit configuration.  That causes higher currents and the magnetic energy that is stored in the dynamic core assembly will short itself out in the resistances of the primary coil wires.  Then part of the cycle as the rotor spins is to "push" energy back into the core/capacitors to replenish the lost magnetic/electrostatic energy.  That causes Lenz drag on the rotor.  And every "push" is 80% in vain because only 20% of that push makes it to the light bulb load.  80% of the push energy is destroyed and rendered unusable as it is turned into waste heat.

Next posting for the test.

MileHigh

[MileHigh]

The test to find the missing 400 watts is a simple thermal test.  All that you need is a LASER thermometer and a notepad and a watch.

For starters, don't run the QEG for one full day.

Again, were are going to assume 400 "missing" watts as an illustration.  We are going to assume for illustrative purposes the thermal time constant of the center of the toroidal core is two hours.  If you don't know what a thermal time constant is then look it up.  If you don't know why I am saying the "center of the core" then look that up also.

Then you start the test.  You run the QEG for one-half hour and every ten minutes you record the temperature of the core at five locations.  You then switch off the QEG and you keep on taking temperature measurements every ten minutes for four more hours.

Then you wait a full day without running the QEG.

For the second part of the test you will not have the QEG running.  Instead, you will just put DC current through the coils.

With your bench power supply, you connect it to the coils of the QEG and you dial up the required current so that the power supply is outputting 400 watts.  You pump 400 watts DC into the QEG and make the same thermal measurements.

Then you compare the temperature data to see how similar it is between the running QEG and the static QEG connected to the DC power supply.

If the two sets of data are very similar, then with a very high degree of certainty you can say that you have solved the mystery of the "missing" watts - the lost power is all being burned off in the wiring because of periodic magnetic short-circuits in the core assembly.

This test is just as important as any attempted over unity test.  The most important thing about testing the QEG is to UNDERSTAND where the power is going.  That's what it's all about.

I am not discussing the fine tuning of this experiment, I am just laying out the broad brush strokes.  The effects due to the air circulation caused by the spinning rotor may have to be compensated for.  Setting up a proper thermal environment is another issue I am not discussing.

Here is a scenario:  You do the thermal test and master it.  Then you try to tune the QEG for over unity but you never get there.  You look at your efficiency numbers and you make some spot thermal checks and because of the knowledge you built up from your own thermal testing, and looking at the RMS current levels in the coils, you KNOW that the missing efficiency is all going into the heating up of the core.

So, that is another challenge for anybody that is truly serious about understanding their QEG build;  understand the measured efficiency of the QEG and relate that back to the temperature rise in the core.

MileHigh