Partnered Output Coils - Free Energy

[poynt99]

It looks odd, but it is correct (the battery that is). Current direction is out of the positive terminal of a battery.

Re. your question; as a magnet is already fully saturated (or should be), it will not act as much of a core if you are hoping for high permeability.

Have you considered redoing the suggested measurements on your existing transformer? Do you agree that something is amiss with them?

[Vortex1]

I will give that a go today Vortex-Thanks for your input.
I will have to ask the same as Poynt did-Is the battery around the wrong way?,or are we using a pnp transistor?.


Brad

No the battery is correct, positive to collector or drain, yes it can be an NPN transistor or N channel FET.

It just looks strange because of the way I wanted the grounds to work out.

Current flow through the devices is correct. We are putting a negative pulse into the coil for a kick start of the ringing.

Regarding the speaker magnet, why change the recipe?, just build a larger version of what you have using similar materials. You can always try external magnetic fields to see the effect, but if you have something you think works, stick with it. The speaker magnet version can come later.

Get some rest Brad, you need it with the flu. Take a break, this stuff can certainly  wait, health is priority.


Kind regards, Vortex1

[tinman]

It looks odd, but it is correct (the battery that is). Current direction is out of the positive terminal of a battery.

Re. your question; as a magnet is already fully saturated (or should be), it will not act as much of a core if you are hoping for high permeability.

Have you considered redoing the suggested measurements on your existing transformer? Do you agree that something is amiss with them?

If we are to go with the current theory of today,then yes,my measurements must be wrong.
But i will continue,as you would have to agree that the transformer build it self is very messy and by no means a high end build. But even if we take into account the measurement error's that !may! be there,the efficiency of this transformer is very high for such a scrappy build. So i am wondering how far the efficiency could be raised if it was built to a higher spec.

So are we to take a chance on the measurements being wrong,and just scrap the whole project,or do we keep going with it due to some odd findings so far?

I choose to keep on with it for a while,and do a higher quality build,as if there is something there,that something dosnt deserve to be binned on a chance that the measurements are only wrong due to current belief's,and not measurement error. Could not the error be the other way also?. There is also the fact that the P/in measured is actually lower than what has been measured due to the phase shift-as MH pointed out. I am yet to see anyone mention that,or try to calculate actual P/in due to that phase shift. I would do it,but that is beyond my knowledge and mathematical abilities. MH said something about switching the scope to x-y-i can find xy on my scope,but when i hit that button i just get an offset oval on my scope screen. Remember,i am a mechanic,not an EE,and only know the basics on scopes and what they show me.

So,if you want your car engine rebuilt,i can do that with my eyes shut,but if you want me to carry out all these fancy EE scope analysis,then you might as well have a conversation with next doors dog.

[Vortex1]

Brad, I think you should stick with it, but only when you are back to full health.

My offerings are on the assumption that the measurements do show something positive. Until your measurements can be absolutely proven wrong there is nothing wrong with trying other simple test methods from other angles than just Pin vs Pout.

There is also a thermal method that can evaluate all the losses to see if there is a gain.
We can get into that later.

For now, don't throw it in the bin, it is worth further testing.

Actually, if possible, I would like to see you complete (and help us complete)the RT project over this project, as that showed undeniable gains.

But get back to health firstly and most importantly. All can wait.

Kind Regards
Vorex1

[poynt99]

The things PW and I asked for are not too complicated.

Why dismiss the anomaly and move on without investigating? Have a look at the diagram again, in particular the two voltage measurements on the secondary, i.e. 1.48V and 128mV.

The current through a resistor is the voltage across it over the resistance value. Calculate the current in R2 and R3, based on the voltage across each. Are they equal? Why not?

We both mentioned this anomaly, but you have not commented on it that I've seen.