Partnered Output Coils - Free Energy

[EMJunkie]

Chris,

Before we leave the MEI device previously posted, I have several comments before discussing the attached scope pix.

I was a little surprised that you didn't mention the buck configuration of the secondaries in the ME3V_25F schematic.  These windings however do not operate as one might assume from their connected polarities but are rather unique in their operation. 

The basic MEI device can be modeled as two back-to-back delay lines with the common (primary L2) open circuited and the outside secondaries connected in various configurations to a load.  Due to this structure, the primary L2 couples to the secondaries L1/L3 via the distributed capacitance between the windings and therefore, the device appears as a capacitive reactance to anything connected to it's input.  As a result, the distributed displacement currents (so called) operate in a unique manner in the low side secondary, in this case L1, in that positive current flows out each end of L1 while L3 operates in a normal manner comparatively.  In addition, the phase of the voltage (not shown) at the junction of L1/L3 is difficult to explain due to these unique interactions within the coils.  IMO, the excess energy and the >90 degree phase shift between the input current and voltage is due to energy extraction from the aether in the distributed capacitance between windings.

Now, in regards to the current usefulness of this device, I've attached a scope pix of a version with certain changes that operates from a pulsed input and dc supply.  CH1(yel) is the input pulse, CH2(blu) is the input current to the device, CH3(pnk) is the output voltage across 51 ohm non-inductive load, and the Math(red) channel is the instantaneous input power over time and shown in mean watts.  It can be seen that the input current is negative for ~50% of the input pulse positive duty cycle and this negative energy can be (and is) recirculated back to the supply with proper circuit design.  The resulting pulsed input power is 88.52mw.  The output power calculates to 145mw resulting in a COP of 1.64.  With refined improvements including power output, the device could be integrated into or added to cell phones or other mobile devices for perpetual charging. 

pm     

PartzMan - NOW were talking!!!

YOU Have completely nailed the whole point of what I have tried to bring to the table: "unique interactions"

The Magnetic Field, changing in Time, is the Pumping Action, Electrons/Charged Particles are Pumped by the Magnetic Field!

Two Coils in a Transformer show Symmetry, Three Coils in a Transformer show Asymmetry, where Two Coils are Partnered Output Coils, can Increase the Conductivity and invoke Excess Energy Output.

Many Configurations work, many don't, but as long as there are Two Coils acting Together, Electromagnetic Induction, and other things like Magnetic Fields, Frequency and so on are satisfied then this works!

Electrical Energy is Pumped, once state X is reached, then Electromagnetic Induction occurs again for a second time, between the Partnered Output Coils.

I agree, a Capacitive Reactance does exist between these Coils, They have Capacity, I have said that before.

Please forgive me, I am slow today, not thinking as clearly as I would like. Some of what I am typing is not coming out right.


   Chris Sykes
       hyiq.org

[partzman]

Hi PartzMan, Energy Conservation is real, its valid, it is a Law that binds all Non Asymmetric Machines!

I agree and will add that it can be used to create OU when properly applied such as in circuits that achieve clockwise BH curve rotation.

I don't agree with the terminology, the Field is not "Collapsing" - It is a Forced Full Reversal (in approx. 400us) with slightly less amplitude. Yes the Field's Between the Two Output Coils Buck, Currents are in Opposite Directions.

The Current Spike is a direct result of a Very Fast Change in the Output Coils Magnetic Fields, again about 400us.

Here we can agree to disagree if I understand your position.  My question is what causes the "forced full reversal" you mention?  My view is that charging an inductor in any configuration results in a local stress of the aether.  When the charge source potential is removed, the stressed aether attempts to return to it's prior state due to COE.  This action can be seen by viewing the various fields, voltages and currents during this action which is demonstrated in the attached scope pix.

Yes, the Output Capacitances are charged at this time, as I indicated in my last image, from the Red Arrow to the Black Arrow is the Energy "Generation" Cycle, because the Time Rate of Change of the Magnetic Field is responsible for the "Generation" of Energy, and because this Configuration, Two Output Coils, can allow for very fast changes, because of the very low AC Resistance we see this big Spike.

Yes.

This is part yes and a part no. The Total Charge being delivered and the Total Charge coming back will only occur at Current Zero Cross, will it not?

I think I agree but I'm not certain about your statement.  Viewing the scope pix makes it clear that the energy once contained in the inductor has now been transferred to the circuit capacitance at the current zero crossing.  I believe this is what you meant.

An example:
   Discharging a pulse into a LC Resonant Tank can only occur if the potential of the Pulse is greater than the value of the Potential of the LC Tank at that point in time.

Other wise, no Pulse will be delivered.

Here I will disagree but again I may not be fully understanding your point.  A resonant network IMO can be fed additional energy at any point in time with numerous methods depending on the circuitry used.   

So, in the below image, the small Black portion of the wave, after the Red Arrow, is where Current is moving back from the Output Capacitance into the Coil again. Before that, Current is being delivered to the Output Capacitances.

Yes.

A nice Circuit Partzman, looks good in many areas. However, I am sorry, either I don't understand what you're trying to show, or if I do, then I don't agree that this circuit is close to Gunny's or my work at all. This circuit misses all the characteristics of "Generating" Electrical Energy! Maybe its more like "Winson Ali" line of work? http://www.winsonali.com/

   Chris Sykes
       hyiq.org

Thanks and I apologize for the sim due to it's odd modeling.  No, it will not produce any excess energy due to the software being written to obey classical laws, but it really does model G's device with a fair amount of reasonable accuracy.  I wish we had a view of Graham's simulation he mentioned.

Regarding the scope pix, the inductor used is a 2"OD ferrite with 2 windings.  One winding is driven while the other is shorted allowing us to produce a fast pulse due to the small leakage inductance between the windings.  CH1(yel) being the gate drive pulse for the mosfet switch, CH2(blu) is the voltage at the mosfet drain, CH3(pnk) is the dc voltage supplying the coil, and CH4(grn) is the coil current measured with a current probe.

BC1 shows the charging phase of Lleak and from this we can derive the inductance using L=E*t/di = 139.4uH.

BC2 shows a magnified view of the collapse event and that the peak current reached in Lleak = 316.6ma resulting in a stored energy of 6.98uJ.

BC3 allows us to reasonably calculate the Coss of the mosfet using C=i*t/de = 59.4pfd.

BC4 allows us to calculate the energy stored in Coss to be 6.29uJ for a transfer efficiency of 90.1%.  Note the rise of voltage on CH3 due to lead inductance which accounts for some of the loss.  Also note that the current is near zero crossing but slightly out of phase due to the above lead inductance.  IMO, the collapsing magnetic field due to aether stress relief has now transferred most of the energy created in Lleak during the charging phase.

BC5 simply shows the energy transfer from Coss to Lleak which ends up in this case to be 5.25uJ.

I think where we differ in our views is the mechanism that creates the initial current decrease or collapse in the inductance.

pm

[EMJunkie]

I agree and will add that it can be used to create OU when properly applied such as in circuits that achieve clockwise BH curve rotation.

Here we can agree to disagree if I understand your position.  My question is what causes the "forced full reversal" you mention?  My view is that charging an inductor in any configuration results in a local stress of the aether.  When the charge source potential is removed, the stressed aether attempts to return to it's prior state due to COE.  This action can be seen by viewing the various fields, voltages and currents during this action which is demonstrated in the attached scope pix.

I think I agree but I'm not certain about your statement.  Viewing the scope pix makes it clear that the energy once contained in the inductor has now been transferred to the circuit capacitance at the current zero crossing.  I believe this is what you meant.

Here I will disagree but again I may not be fully understanding your point.  A resonant network IMO can be fed additional energy at any point in time with numerous methods depending on the circuitry used.   

Yes.

Thanks and I apologize for the sim due to it's odd modeling.  No, it will not produce any excess energy due to the software being written to obey classical laws, but it really does model G's device with a fair amount of reasonable accuracy.  I wish we had a view of Graham's simulation he mentioned.

Regarding the scope pix, the inductor used is a 2"OD ferrite with 2 windings.  One winding is driven while the other is shorted allowing us to produce a fast pulse due to the small leakage inductance between the windings.  CH1(yel) being the gate drive pulse for the mosfet switch, CH2(blu) is the voltage at the mosfet drain, CH3(pnk) is the dc voltage supplying the coil, and CH4(grn) is the coil current measured with a current probe.

BC1 shows the charging phase of Lleak and from this we can derive the inductance using L=E*t/di = 139.4uH.

BC2 shows a magnified view of the collapse event and that the peak current reached in Lleak = 316.6ma resulting in a stored energy of 6.98uJ.

BC3 allows us to reasonably calculate the Coss of the mosfet using C=i*t/de = 59.4pfd.

BC4 allows us to calculate the energy stored in Coss to be 6.29uJ for a transfer efficiency of 90.1%.  Note the rise of voltage on CH3 due to lead inductance which accounts for some of the loss.  Also note that the current is near zero crossing but slightly out of phase due to the above lead inductance.  IMO, the collapsing magnetic field due to aether stress relief has now transferred most of the energy created in Lleak during the charging phase.

BC5 simply shows the energy transfer from Coss to Lleak which ends up in this case to be 5.25uJ.

I think where we differ in our views is the mechanism that creates the initial current decrease or collapse in the inductance.

pm

Hi PartzMan - If I may say, I find it odd, your thinking surrounding the entire Electrical Energy discussion we have had, does not spend any time on the "Generation" of Electrical Energy?

All your posts focus on the direct injection of Charge, into Coils/Capacitors and shuttling this already "Generated" Electrical Energy around. Clearly you know your Electronics inside out and back to front, you know your Math inside out and back to front, which I commend you for! You're well ahead of me in this area!


Thinking out loud here: Generalising

Electronics enforces a tainting, a subconscious mentality, that we must use a V/I Source, already Charged with "Generated" Electrical Energy! If the Source is not Charged, it is "Dead" - Terminology implying that it is no longer of use.

There is a series of CLOSED DOORS at every point, as soon as any Electrical Energy is "Generated", it is called a Parasitic Inductance - Implying it is no use and not wanted, not desirable!

An of course in many cases a Parasitic Inductance might be undesirable for the Circuit as it will change the Characteristics of the Circuit, introducing Noise, damaging Hardware and so on!



Question:

   Does a Parasitic Inductance follow the same Laws as Electromagnetic Induction, and does Electromagnetic Induction not Charge our V/I Source? The one we consider "Dead" if it is not Charged?



   Chris Sykes
       hyiq.org

[EMJunkie]

An example, Parasitic Inductance, best I have seen is actually TK's, where an EMF is "Generated" in a Wire Wound Resistor that was used as a Current Sensing Resistor.

Electric OU: Spurious Current Amplitudes Caused By Inductive Current Sense Resistors

TK has done an excellent job showing us so many wonderful things over the many years he has shared his knowledge.

Again, the Time Rate of Change of the Magnetic Field, which is the Current Flow which is also changing in Time, the Current IS the Magnetic Field, induces an EMF in the Conductors in the Proximity, in accordance to the equation: E.M.F = -N dPhi_B/dt

So, again, we want exactly this effect, we want Electromagnetic Induction, between two Current Carrying Conductors, Partnered Output Coils, increasing the Total Electromagnetic Induction, and also because of Asymmetry back on the Primary, and the Symmetry of the Partnered Output Coils, showing very little, or no Reflectance back on the Primary.

   Chris Sykes
       hyiq.org

[EMJunkie]

Hi Chris thanks , by cumpliments . Wish you a great new year !

Hi Nelson, I wonder if you would like to explain how the below Circuit works?

There is some similarity to one of my early experiments: My Experiment from a long time ago

For those that wish to learn a little more, Nelson has a Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3S4lCUvzn0E and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TjK6OlYO9Aw


   Chris Sykes
       hyiq.org