"Tiny Orbo Replication" over 100% efficiency

[exnihiloest]

A bunch more blogs, including my latest circuit (still in progress),

http://globalfreeenergy.info/tag/tiny-orbo-replication/

Hi Paul,

I'm refering to:
http://globalfreeenergy.info/2010/01/19/tiny-orbo-replication-170-efficient/

I'm pleased to find accurate measurements and calculus here. I perfectly agree with the method you are using to evaluate the COP.

Nevertheless I see a possible flaw in the data so I have a question: how do you estimate the coil inductance during pulse?

The inductance depends on both the magnet position and the current in the coil. From my own experiments, I found that the inductance can drastically change from one to less than one tenth with a coil current around 1 A, because the current participates in saturating the ferrite core.

At the begining of the pulse, the effect of the current onto the ferrite permeability is not yet established, thus inductance should be much higher than later and it will not change instantly. I'm afraid that we have to integrate 0.5*d(L*i²)/dt² over the pulse duration to get the right power instead of using a mean inductance value which is possibly irrelevant.

(PS- I also posted the same in the Steorn thread cause I had not seen this one).

[PaulLowrance]

I'm pleased to find accurate measurements and calculus here. I perfectly agree with the method you are using to evaluate the COP. Nevertheless I see a possible flaw in the data so I have a question: how do you estimate the coil inductance during pulse?

Hi,

The inductance was calculated from initial RL curve analysis when the magnet was at TDC. The current pulse followed a typical RL curve. The reason I'm comfortable that this is accurate enough for this measurements is based on a lot of variations in the coil applied voltage. Increasing the battery voltage by varying amounts would obviously increase the current RL curve. The increased voltage did not change the shape of the RL curve, but just the amplitude. For example, increasing the battery voltage by say 4 times would show the same RL curve, except 4 times the amplitude. As you know, during the initial part of an RL curve is mostly reactance, not resistance, and toward the end of the curve it's more resistance than reactance. This allowed me to see how linear the core was at varying levels of current at these *saturation* levels. I spent a great amount of time analyzing this core on the scope. It has two distinct modes. It's either incredibly high permeability, or low permeability. So it's very easy to see on the scope which part of the BH curve the core is in.

Another area to address is how far did the magnet move during this current pulse. As you can see in the blog post, the magnet was rotating at 26.5 revolutions per second, which comes to 0.57 degrees of movement in 100us, which comes to 0.005" (0.01cm) movement.

So to summarize what was occurring to the core -->

1. The magnet moves to TDC.

2. Voltage is applied to the coil.

3. There is a *brief* period where the core is in ultra high permeability. This was seen in the scope where di/dt was lower then I could detect, and the current was near zero amps. Regardless how much I amplified the signal, it was a flat as a pancake, ~ 0 amps, and understandably so given this cores.

4. All of a sudden the core switches to low permeability as the hits the roof of the square BH curve. This is where nearly *all* of the energy goes into decreasing the cores magnetic attraction toward the magnets. The changes in the cores ultra high permeability have no measurable changes in the core to magnet attraction. So during this phase the core's permeability was relatively linear relative to current.

5. The current reaches its near max of the RL curve due to electrical resistance. At this point we're still appreciably less than 100us, and the magnet is still close to TDC.


So that's why I used the inductance equation of E = 1/2 * L * I^2 because the cores permeability at that current level and cores saturation level was appreciably linear far above 1.26 amps. Furthermore, my COP 1.7 measurement did not even consider how much of that energy could have been recaptured. It is my opinion that at that area of the BH curve (in the saturation area), the core would be relatively linear with or without the magnet. If true, then a large amount of that energy that went into inductance could be recaptured, which would increase the COP measurements.

[Magluvin]

Hey Paul

Nice lil Orbaby. =] Here is a thing to try that i have not seen yet. If you have 4 mags on the rotor, try 3 toroids in series next to each other and have them fire of one at a time one after another. Or even 3 at triangle points around the rotor. I know that 2 more pulses per rotation will mean more input, BUT, if it moves faster the pulses will be shorter and you just might get more for your money here. And if it is going faster for the same input, a charge coil will have more effect at generating to replace what is taken.
I thought about it last night and others are just pulsing all coil at the same time. This might give an advantage.

Orbonomics.

Mags

[skywatcher]

Calculations say nothing. They can be wrong.

The only real proof for overunity is closing the loop.

[PaulLowrance]

Calculations say nothing.

Calculations on got us to moon. Calculations put & keep satellites in orbit. Calculations create nanoscopic technology such as your CPU's. Calculations predict the nuclear energy for Nuclear power plants. Calculations predicted blackholes before they were discovered. Calculations predicted the exact amount that light would bend around the Sun for Einsteins monumental Solar eclipse experiment. Calculations are used for everything in the modern world, including the amount of energy your home uses.