Partnered Output Coils - Free Energy

[EMJunkie]

Please correct me if I am wrong!!!

In the below Analysis you can see there is two parts to the Input Cycle. Two Portions of Active, real Power, marked in Blue. Also two Portion's of Reactive, or Negative Power, thats Power returning back to the Source. Marked in Orange.

The Yellow Lines are marked as Peak Power for each Part of the Power Cycle, for one Cycle. The following, is based on AC Sine Waves, that are not distorted, because of some degree of distortion, there will be some degree of Inaccuracy in some of these figures.

   Peak Power (Real) :
       DC: V * I = 2.37 * 0.0225 = 0.053325
       Phase Angle: 90
       Active Watts: 0
       Apparent Power:  0.053325
       Reactive Power: 0.053325
       Power Factor: 0

   Peak Power (Negative) :
       DC: V * I = 11.75 * 0.075 = 0.88125
       Phase Angle: 261.8
       Active Watts: -0.125691718125
       Apparent Power:  0.88125
       Reactive Power: -0.87224027625
       Power Factor: -0.1426289


Realising, this is not best practice, measuring and calculating Power at peak Values and also from Wave Forms that are not symetrical. Full Wave Integration needs to be applied to this to get an accurate idea. However, it is fairly easy to see, the Total Area, Positive Active Power (Marked in Blue), is far less that the Total Area of the Negative Power (Marked in Orange).


So, whats the Energy here? Lets look:

   Energy_Positive (E) = ( 1/2  * ( Inductance (L) * Current (I) ) )² = 1/2 * 2.40 * 0.0225 ² = 2.125764E-06 Joules.

   Energy_Negative (E) = ( 1/2 * ( Inductance (L) * Current (I) ) )² = 1/2 * 2.40 * -0.075 ² = 0.00026244 Joules.

Please check my Math. You can see this is a massive difference!!! From: 0.000002125764 Supplied, Positive Joules, to 0.00026244 Returned, Negative Joules. Thats more than 2 Orders of Magnitude, more Joules Returning to the Source than was supplied, at each of the Peaks in one Cycle...


Again, If I have this wrong, please correct me.

You can see, an external Magnetic Field added to a System, and Moving this Magnetic Field, in the System, can, and does, add energy to the System. Thus the "Generation" of electrical Energy.

   Chris Sykes
       hyiq.org

[Magluvin]

Really good question Mags!!!

Try the below picture, I have used this before for different task and it works fine.

Detecting Electric Fields is normally the task of an Electrometer, or an Electrostatic Field Detector, but many are probe dependant and measure Terminal Potential Difference Voltages.

Below is an example of an Electrostatic Field Detector, Handheld that does not require Probes.

Hope this Helps Mags.

   Chris Sykes
       hyiq.org


P.S: I dont know of a way to detect Electric Fields without using some kind of Conductors. I have heard of Chemical methods, where a reaction is exhibited in the presence of Electric Fields, but never seen or been able to find relivant data on it.

The question was, back then, is if we have a toroid transformer, pri on left and sec on right, is there magnetic flux that crosses over the hole in the toroid in order to have that flux cut the secondary to induce the secondary, or, there is no flux that escapes the core material and the sec would only be induced by the E field around the core produced by the primary. I think you were in that thread at the time.

In this link    http://overunity.com/8597/solid-state-orbo-system/msg224747/#msg224747
shows a pic of a flux gate type setup. Notice the 4 small coils in the outer perimeter of the core with through holes in the core. In the other thread we were in we discussed trying that outer perimeter setup shown in the link and also doing the same on the inner perimeter. The funny thing is, in the link provided, the reason for putting those control coils as show is for a lenz less effect when the output coil becomes active. As in the output doesnt affect the input.

So my argument was, if we did the experiment of having a toroid core, with a primary on the left, and 1 sec on the right of the inner perimeter of the core, and another secondary on the outside perimeter, as shown in the link, would the inner perimeter sec be induced by the primary? And also test the outer sec for induction from the primary.
For me, if the inner perimeter sec is induced by the primary, but the outer sec is not, then I have to think that it is the flux crossing the hole that induces the sec and not the E field. Otherwise if it is the E field inducing the inner sec, then why would it not induce the outer sec, if this E field is circling the radius of the core?

To my original question, are we saying that if we have a wheel of magnets spinning, we can measure an E field, and only when it rotates? Or is the detector being induced by flux cutting of the device? What if one of those devices does detect the moving magnet, then we would have to test it the other way around. Put the detector on the wheel and the mag stationary. If the E field is produced only if the magnet is moving, then this second test should show no detection as compared to the first test. I couldnt live with the first test being conclusive without test 2.

Mags

[EMJunkie]

Hi Mags, yes I remember the topic.

The idea of a Core, is to make the Path for the Flux as easy as possible to travel. This is called Magnetic Peameability and relates to the Magnetic Reluctance, there is a good article here: Calculating the strength of a magnet

Also some good data: Magnetic Reluctance

A really good Transformer will have very little Flux Leakage, a badly designed Transformer will have more Flux Leakage.

So, I guess, this is a "Depends on Design" sort of question. Generally, the more Flux Leakage the worse the performance the Power Transformation will be.

Some Transformers have a Magnetic Shunt, there will be a jump of Flux at a certian point, where the Forward Current and Reverse Current, Lenz's Law, will oppose, and the Reluctance is not great enough to keep the Flux in the Main Core. See Below Image. This creates dual paths for the Flux.

If Magnetic Flux finds an easier path other than the Core, then it will leak out and Close Loop, from North to South pole.

Allthough this is "Best Practice" in Transformer theory, if its the case that there is more than one Source of Magnetif Flux and especially if the geometry allows for it, then this Leakage can be of benefit!!!

See: Self Assisted Oscillation or Field Effect Amplification of an Induced Rotating Magnetic Field - this particular design is not efficent, but it does show how Flux Leakage can increase by adding another Source of Magnetic Field.


   Chris Sykes
       hyiq.org

[EMJunkie]

Power is the Product of Voltage times Current, averaged over time and this power is called the Mean, or Average Power.

How does this work, and what does area have to do with it?

To Integrate the Wave Forms means to take as many small Rectangles under each of the Wave Form's, and get the value of this very small Rectangle, it is really good to watch this video: What Is an Integral? - Thus Integrating the Wave Forms gives us a Value over time of the Power. Thats why Area of the Rectangles are important.

The Mean or Average Power over Time, which is in its own right, Watts, Energy over Time, or Joules Per-Second.

This is done for Current (I) and at the same time for Voltage (V) and each Rectangle is thus the Product, Voltage (V) * Current (I) over Time = Watts.

As an example, at the Peaks shown above, on the Yellow Lines, each Yellow Line could represent a small rectangle. This Area was calculated and the Figures for an Instantaneous value of Power:

   Peak Power (Real) :
       Instantaneous: V * I = 2.37 * 0.0225 = 0.053325

   Peak Power (Negative) :
       Instantaneous: V * I = 11.75 * 0.075 = 0.88125


So, the more area the more the Average or Mean Power will be. Either Input or Output... No one has pointed out any mistakes, and I have made some, to see if anyone was paying attention...

EG: Voltage should have been: -11.75 and not 11.75 also, the Phase angle was not 90 on the input, but in fact closer to 82 Degrees. Its not important any way as this was irrelevant.

   Peak Power (Negative) :
       Instantaneous: V * I = -11.75 * 0.075 = -0.88125

Below, the Red Boxes are Current, to be Integrated from the Zero Graticle Line to the Wave Peak, Negative or Positive, the Blue Boxes are Voltage, to be Integrated from the Zero Graticle Line to the Wave Peak, Negative or Positive - The Product, is Voltage times Current, and these Values are averaged over time.

We are going to have to be smart and cross all our t's and dot all our i's if we are going to get anywhere with this. Once a grasp is obtained, it gets so much easier.


   Chris Sykes
       hyiq.org


P.S: Just maybe, the assumed knowledge of, or lack of, the Scope, was slightly under appreciated...

P.P.S: I should be Clear, this is Input Only Analysis, on a LC Tank Circuit with Permanent Magnets added to the System, no Output has been looked at yet.

[Magluvin]

Hi Mags, yes I remember the topic.

The idea of a Core, is to make the Path for the Flux as easy as possible to travel. This is called Magnetic Peameability and relates to the Magnetic Reluctance, there is a good article here: Calculating the strength of a magnet

Also some good data: Magnetic Reluctance

A really good Transformer will have very little Flux Leakage, a badly designed Transformer will have more Flux Leakage.

So, I guess, this is a "Depends on Design" sort of question. Generally, the more Flux Leakage the worse the performance the Power Transformation will be.

Some Transformers have a Magnetic Shunt, there will be a jump of Flux at a certian point, where the Forward Current and Reverse Current, Lenz's Law, will oppose, and the Reluctance is not great enough to keep the Flux in the Main Core. See Below Image. This creates dual paths for the Flux.

If Magnetic Flux finds an easier path other than the Core, then it will leak out and Close Loop, from North to South pole.

Allthough this is "Best Practice" in Transformer theory, if its the case that there is more than one Source of Magnetif Flux and especially if the geometry allows for it, then this Leakage can be of benefit!!!

See: Self Assisted Oscillation or Field Effect Amplification of an Induced Rotating Magnetic Field - this particular design is not efficent, but it does show how Flux Leakage can increase by adding another Source of Magnetic Field.


   Chris Sykes
       hyiq.org

Hmm. I get all that.  What I want to know is if you believe in flux cutting in order to induce current in a secondary conductor, or do you believe that it is an E field that produces current in the secondary conductor.   

The pdf below explains my argument. Its not a long read.

Mags