Kapanadze and other FE discussion

[ramset]

AG did post this in Kapanadze topic but it should probably go here first ?

AG ..Power from the Sun ...

Stefan put these links in the comments

..Snip
overunity.com >>> Go here: The full website is: http://zpower.biz/ or: http://zpower.net/ And here new infos: https://spark.adobe.com/page/sRdP4qaNoCRW0/      http://fluxpowertechnology.com/
------------------------------------------
PS..
in another bit of open source FE business a member at Energetic forum that shares his work  asks a question about iron Oxide [he is a good man and can use all the support this community can offer IMO
and besides helping him it would be useful for experimenters here working with 3d printers or "other" in outside the box experiments...

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/21092-velocity-factor-black-iron-oxide.html

[stivep]

overunity.com >>> Go here: The full website is: http://zpower.biz/ or: http://zpower.net/ And here new infos: https://spark.adobe.com/page/sRdP4qaNoCRW0/      http://fluxpowertechnology.com/


http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/21092-velocity-factor-black-iron-oxide.html

http://zpower.biz/
in 10:19  https://youtu.be/MsJwRznsf4o?t=612
The guy says about oscilloscope in such a way that the conclusion indicates variable components.

in 10:31 https://youtu.be/MsJwRznsf4o?t=631
The guy is warning about dangerous shock. That indicates  HV.
However measurement  shows 15.5V.
Well easy enough HV low current  = low  voltage High current
So meter is switched to DC and it only shows DC component.
The AC component can not damage  the meter as the current is   low.
But meter on AC does not show it. It shows only 138 mV.

We have enclosure of  helicopter light that has light bulb replaced.  The original lightbulb was 800W : 28V DC = 28.571A
The  guy conforms that he removed  original  lightbulb and all electronics from the enclosure.
We assume that replaced  lightbulb used the same mirror and   it was at nominal  24V with the device now  at ~ 18V  of steady  DC component under load.
At my Gamma Scientific PHO 4040,  light  from the video at its brightest point was compared to light of incandescent flat light from 45W light bulb.
This light was recorded  and than projected  and measured  on the same screen of my computer side by side .
The light used as my reference was measured from the distance of   3.5m .
That is close to the estimated distance of the camera to the reflector from the video.
The two brightest points of both  indicated ~ 42W .
However if  we approximate focused  light beam from helicopter  reflector  using mirror. we come to  lightbulb  of 35W running at approximately 50% of its nominal brightness.
that means  16-17W.

And now  lets take as a base  for calculation the maximum  of possible - nominal 45W.
So my error in  calculation of power dissipated by the reflector can be within  45:100 x 35= 15.75
15.75 : 2 = +/-  7.875%
So  the  effective range of  energy consumed by  Lightbulb  inside the reflector is   in  average   its maximum  around  20 to 22 W
To low 12W to 15W.
That is why the guy used helicopter reflector mirror  instead   of just regular incandescent lightbulb.
He wanted to impress potential viewer with  light intensity.

Please note that the original lightbulb used 4 wires than connected to regular  outlet box.
The module with   quote 

5 different  frequencies

can be simply digital switch  switching relay inside enclosure to the battery using one single impulse.
the stack of plates  can be additional battery  (in addition  to the one hidden in  the helicopter  light enclosure .)


enclosure of that  reflector has enough place for quite good battery inside.

Wesley
 

[Void]

... and it is not even a full moon. 

Meanwhile, let's get back to the lab, and see what we have on the slab...

My current test setup with some new improvements seems to still be showing COP < 1, but so far at least seemingly giving
quite high efficiency. I know I can get the efficiency at least a little better yet, as I haven't fully optimized the setup yet.
Will I be able to break the COP = 1 barrier? Chances are I won't, but I am not giving up (yet). My current circuit concept
at least theoretically should be at least quite efficient, which my latest design appears to be so far, and by my way of thinking
it might possibly do even a little better than it is performing now once I get everything optimized. What's my point?
My first several tries at this circuit did not perform well at all, but I observed what were the main issues with
the setup and thought about how I might be able to address those issues. I then made changes to the setup
in a step by step manner and observed whether my new changes helped or not. I am learning from both my
failures and from what helps improve the setup's performance. My suggestion is take things step by step
and don't be put off by failures. Learn from those failures and use this new knowledge to design better setups.
Theory and ideas can only take you so far. You must start testing at some point on the test bench, and approaching
this testing in a systematic and step by step progressive manner is probably a very good idea, IMO. Don't
let failures discourage you, but you must be willing to observe carefully and think about the implications from different
angles so you can learn from your failures. My two cent's worth for the new year.

P.S. As has been pointed out already here, if the theory behind your test setup does not include a way to draw in
energy from external to your test setup into your test setup, you are not likely at all ever going to see a COP > 1.
Start with a theory for achieving COP > 1 which you think potentially at least holds some promise, then put this theory
to the test systematically on the test bench. If it doesn't work at all as predicted and you have tested it well, then
you probably need to go back to the drawing board at that point.

[ramset]

Paul just dropped this
https://www.dropbox.com/s/xjto75krz7vtyuj/Tesla%20Turbo%20%C2%A9%20Copyright%202019%20-%20All%20Rights%20Reserved%20-%20Open%20Source%20Project%20v0.1.m4v?dl=0..
over here...
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/21075-nikola-tesla-s-turbine-secrets-global-open-source-project-4.html
..
Not sure if he has achieved phase change with gain [ala Clem]or ??
and yes I know.... its not good to hug the plastic at a zillion RPM [very exciting.... Butt ?!!]
actual demo starts at 2 min mark ,runaway ?or ? at the end//
Quite possible they are seeing a second stage hitting its design window and needing much less input,....self run would tell for certain if they hit a phase change with gain or ??..
regardless the fearless hand does seem to initiate the increase RPM when he applies that back pressure to the out flow [standing wave hand tuned exhaust .....
wild stuff indeed

[SolarLab]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rCC8mY7ykM4 (part 2)
   [Includes Grenade in simulation Schematic]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dOJfr_lz0jU (part 1)

Thank you ACCA
FIN

Addendum:
RUSLAN videos (physical device appreciation)
https://www.youtube.com/user/DragonsLord76/videos

FIN