Thane Heins BI-TOROID TRANSFORMER

[wayne49s]

Here's a breakthrough in the BITT replication:

800% power increase (480 watt output) with room for potential improvement:

http://pesn.com/2011/03/20/9501793_Two_Toroid_Over-Unity_Gabriel_Device_--_Part_1/

[Feynman]

Holy smokes, great find!

Thanks!!!   If this is true, this is the breakthrough we've all been looking for.

This is absolutely the most promising design I have found so far regarding the potential COP>1 system with usable output, due to its elegance and simplicity.   This is like Thane's system on crack.  Let's hope this is for real.

Without a load on the secondary, the primary circuit consumes 420 watts (3.5 amps at 120 volts) as displayed by the power meter plugged into the wall. As he adds loads (usually lights) to the secondary, something very interesting happens. The primary current starts to drop! Actually, the more load he places on the secondary, the less power the primary consumes. He has been able to get the primary circuit power consumption down to 60 watts (.5 amps at 120 volts) while outputting 480 watts (4 amps at 120 volts). His output is 800% that of the primary consumption!

Incredible.  I'm very strongly considering diverting resources from all other projects to this particular replication effort, as it greatly simplifies Thane Heins' design.

The main reason I was not bothering with the Thane Heins replication was due to the complexity of creating his primary design, creating the iron core primary from scratch, etc. This is alot of work!  Though, I absolutely believe Thane has overunity, well above COP=3.

This breakthrough toroidal design by David Klingelhoefer , if it holds up to scrutiny, will have much higher efficiency and is much simpler!  Much much easier to create. 

The only problem is the patent (intellectual property), which arguably may or may not belong to Thane Heins and/or David Klingelhoefer if he applies for a patent within a year.  I don't want to get involved in lawyer-nonsense, but the Gabriel device might be called an 'obvious' replication of Thane's work.  I have no idea.  We can leave this for the lawyers to sort out.  As long as people don't sell these units (we open-source the design), I think we are okay. 

I should also add we make sure both Thane Heins and David Klingelhoefer get credit for their work, and that one (or both of them) get royalties for any commercial use. However, this does not prevent us from open-source and/or replications.

As many of you know, the problem with commercial OU devices anyway is the bastards at the UL / FCC suppressing innovation with their bureaucracy (I mean, uh, prevent circuits from starting fires).

Anyway I'm going to divert resources to a replication of this phenomenon.   

P.S.  I suspect (but can't prove) the reason the output peaks at 480 watts is due to the flux-capacity ('flux capacitor', lol) aka. saturation of the toroid and/or the iron shell.  The way to increase the system's capability above 480 watts is to (A) get a bigger toroid with more magnetic flux capacity  or (B) wire multiple toroids together in parallel, perhaps through inverter or rectifier, or (C) make the iron shell more form-fitting.

I know David Klingelhoefer is persuing option (C) over the next few weeks in order to increase his claimed COP.

You can probably make this into a self-runner by looping the output through a power control circuit , perhaps with a capacitor /microcontroller to provide a buffer to prevent the thing from frying itself.   It may also be necessary to isolate the input AC circuit for self-running operation with an inverter, perhaps also with diodes, capacitor and/or battery.

Anyway this is great news if it's legit, which in my personal opinion, I think is 'yes'.  But the only way to tell is via replication, which I will be starting on immediately.   This toroidal idea is simply brilliant if it works.

[Feynman]

Okay guys, I'm in contact with David.  Hopefully if I get okay from him I will post the details here.

[wayne49s]

I think David's approach represents a new design / patent. I worked in a large telecom company before and it's my understanding that concepts cannot be patented. There are different patents involved with the idea of re-routing the secondary magnetic flux. In any case, patents are related to commercial use of specific implementation, and does not apply to personal replication for private use. In any case, David has a year to follow up on patenting his design for its potential commercial benefit.

Feynman, did you get a chance to check with David where to get the steel shell?.. I don't know where to get that part and am interested to replicate the implementation; it is very simple and elegant.

/Wayne

[Feynman]

@wayne49s

Thanks for posting that information here, otherwise I wouldn't have found out about this great news that made my day.  I'm in contact with David via email, and I started a new thread to discuss his device and replications. 

The Gabriel device, possible COP=8
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=10518.msg278878#new

David Klingelhoefer said Thane Heins had offered to write the patent for him,lol, so I think you are right.  But the good news is that David doesn't care about the patent -- he wants to open source it! 

I would like to add that Thane has contacted me on wanting me to get a patent filed and said he would write it for me.... Im in the circle that everyone has the right to free energy and by the hand that guides me it will happen.
- David Klingelhoefer , private email with Feynman 03/22/2011

So let's see if we can maybe get some replications going to confirm the device, and if we can replicate David's results via open-source, then we can work on closed-loop mode.

The Gabriel device, possible COP=8
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=10518.msg278878#new