Self running coil?

[gyulasun]

Hi Luc,

Mark also found an even better type:
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=8892.msg233538#msg233538


And it is at newark.com:

http://www.newark.com/jsp/search/results.jsp?N=0&Ntk=gensearch_001&Ntt=STS2DNF30&Ntx=mode+matchallpartial&suggestions=false&ref=globalsearch&_requestid=114222&isGoback=false&isRedirect=false

MAybe it would be worth trying too.

Thanks for the new video,  I am surprised you found using a second pick up coil already reflects back to the tank circuit?

rgds,  Gyula

[Lazaris2005]

--

The spacer between the coil and the magnet provides the push. You can think of the spacer as a kind of spring. It gets compressed slightly by the magnet when the pulse is off due to the magnets attraction to the core ...

Great !
To me, it makes perfect sense.
And it opens a good field for optimizations, i think, regarding the spacer's material.
In my imagination, It would require a material with a good shape memory and superelasticity.
As an orthodontist, i instantly thought of nickel-titanium (Ni-Ti), or nitinol alloys.
http://herkules.oulu.fi/isbn9514252217/html/x317.html
As far as i know, but not entirely sure, this alloy is non ferro magnetic.
It would not be expensive or hard to make spacers with a small acrylic disc holding 4 or more small 0.012 wires as "legs",  providing an spring effect.
The choice of material could provide better amplitude on magnets micro movements, optimizing it's work.

Just my 2 cents.
Hope it sounds not too much stupid

Men, please keep this great work.

[gotoluc]

Now i have 2 different coils (one with 315 mH (1 layer), the other with 2480 mH (3 layers) combined inductance).

But i'm not able to replicate any of the interesting effects.   

There is no clearly visible resonant frequency. I tried it with frequencies from 100 Hz up to more than 100 kHz. I looked at the voltage measured across one half of the coil. It changes it's shape (sometimes it's more rectangular, sometimes it looks more than one half of a sine wave) and it changes also its magnitude but only slightly.

The voltage measured across the 1 ohm resistor is generally very low. With 5 mV/div resolution of my scope i can barely see any differences.

Also the magnet has no visible effects. It reduces the inductance only slightly (about half the value measured without magnet) although it's a very strong neo magnet (N48, 10 mm diameter x 10 mm).

Maybe the ferrite core is not suitable to see the effects. I don't know. But i'm not motivated to make dozens of new coils with other cores to try this out.   

Wow   skywatcher... 2480mH with only 3 layers!

This is definitely high enough. However, you are saying that the inductance barely changes when the magnet is attached!... this should not be. This is where the problem is.

What color are your cores?

Luc

[gotoluc]

@Luc,

Could you give me a conclusion?  I need to confirm something... 

Could you remove [as in physically take it away] your pick-up coil for a while and tune your circuit is most optimal state.  Once you have that, place your Pick-up coil back again, but do *not* put a load on it.

If my thinking is correct, your circuit became now in an *de-tuned* state ! - Could you confirm that for me?

Also, you will [easily] be able to bring your circuit back in resonance again, by *lowering* your frequency slightly [I'm not to sure if it is lowering, but I think is it lowering]. - Could you confirm this is also true ?

Now when you place a load on the Pick-up coil [or short circuit it] you should *not* see any negative effects on your circuit as in cap de-charge, or de-tuning effects. - Could you confirm this is also true ? [***]

If you have an extra magnet laying around (such a small round one):  if you have your circuit is perfect tuned state, and you add [stack] the small magnet at the end of the others, your circuit will become *de-tuned* and you can re-tune it back again, by *increasing* the frequency a bit. - Can you confirm this is true ?

Ok, that is it :-)

I've  analyzed your scope shots, and it appears to me that I understand what is going on. Your pick-up coil can be greatly improved by making full use of all available energy available on that side.. you will need a tubercular coil, so it can 'pick-up' all available energy along the Z-ax. Also this solves the number of pick-up coils to just *one* with a better effective factor.  If you have a 'sniffer' to look around where you have still good M-fields, you can take that factor as outer width for your coil.

[***] It *is* possible that if you put a NON resistive load on the pickup coil, it *could* have negative effects on the rest of your circuit, but [if true] these can be fixed.

--
NextGen67

Hi NextGen67,

I have done the tests you suggest above some days back but did NOT take notes at the time. I will redo all the tests and post the results or a video which ever is easier for me to do.

Luc

[HarryV]

Harry: The spacer between the coil and the magnet provides the push. You can think of the spacer as a kind of spring. It gets compressed slightly by the magnet when the pulse is off due to the magnets attraction to the core. The spacer expands when the pulse is on because the core's attractiveness is reduced.  See my attached concept diagram. The magnet placement and the flatter coil help to maximise the difference in attraction between the on and off states. (edited)

nextgen67: You realize that the energy to vibrate the magnet is coming from what *we* put into it - right? And since it takes *work* to do the displacement of the magnet, we lose energy with it by such. The energy you receive from the magnet 'vibrate back' to the coil, is put in by *us* in the first place to 'vibrate away' it, and since it took *work*, what comes back is *less* than what we did put in in the first place.

For the moment think of a  coil spring compressed by a stone. Imagine you can switch gravity off so it expands to its uncompressed height because the stone is now weightless. At this height you switch gravity on again, and the coil spring is compressed again. If the energy to switch gravity off is less than the work done
by the stone to compress the spring, then free energy will be produced when the coil spring expands.
The magnet and spring behave the same way. If the energy to switch off the magnetism (i.e. rotate the domains in the core) is less than the work done by the magnet compressing the spring, free energy will be produced when the spring expands.

because the core's attractiveness is reduced.

Which is because *WE* fed it with the energy to do so.

Yes, but besides stating CoE, we don't know if the energy stored in the spring
is the same as the energy required to rotate the core domains.

So, when the 'core's attractiveness is not reduced' anymore, you think that then we will receive a gain in energy, because the magnet *would* inject energy [by moving back to the core again]... But this energy is the one that is has *cost* us to make it less attractive in the first place [minus the losses, because *work* has done]. See what you have achieved as a temporary storage... you store something, and then a little later you receive it back again [minus some energy because it has cost some of that to do the *work* to enable storage].

Instead now look at it like this:

Imagine this: You push hard against a 500Kg stone and the stone does not move [because it is to heavy]... The *work* done [you pushing], *must* go *somewhere*.... Would it in fact not be *you* who would move instead ? ... Ok, now translate this fact back to the magnet and core

The concept I have described is like the orbo, except instead taping the circular motion of the rotor magnets with a pickup coil, you would tap the linear oscillation of the magnets with a pickup coil.

Some free energy might be injected to the coils, but I suspect much more can be tapped with a pick up coil.

Look at the scope shot I included earlier, and find the places where the magnet *would* 'vibrate up' , and places where it *would* 'vibrate back'.... Interesting isn't it?

Besides the bump, between the up and down '*would be* movement' of the magnet (along it's time line), where it *would be* coming down till it finally is back in start position [the horizontal duty cycle length part, off phase now!], see what is happening there in the scope shot? Even more interesting.. isn't it.... *that* is where the 0.005 mW seems to come from.

The scope shot I refer to: http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=8892.msg233528#msg233528

Yes, the trace seems to be consist with a magnet oscillating.

Edit: This might also explain *why* it is so extremely important to have the *exact* [well as exact as possible] 'tuning' for the resonance... Because if the magnet it's *would be* movement was not *exactly* in line with the coils behavior, there would be no gain [which is clearly happening as Luc shows when he de-tunes the coil].

Yes.

Edit2:

    The question is does the energy required for rotation equal or exceed the energy of the induced current due to the motion of the magnets. If it does, then it is not overunity.

Well, I'm a bit reluctant to say it so bluntly, but yes, looking at the scope picture, it has -to me- undeniable AE properties -very small- but nevertheless there ! (as a side note, even more remarkably the same as Steorns one!... it is a copy actually time line wise seen).

(I use the term AE[Additional Energy] instead of OU, meaning OU=energy from nowhere, thus created, while AE comes from *somewhere* other than what we fed into the device)

--
NextGen67

I think the bumps represent back emf so this need to be mimized. This is what Steorn did by arranging their magnets as they did.