The Gabriel Device, possible COP=8
Operation: Thane Heins effect based device.
Replication: None yet.
Closed-loop: Not attempted, can fry the windings without input current control circuitry. (i.e. inverter, battery charger , and battery)
Independent Verification: The Heins' effect has been independently verified, but Klingelhoefer's implementation has not.
Input: 120VAC at 0.5Amp
Output: 120VAC at 4Amp
Quote[David Klingelhoefer's] idea is simple, but fundamentally changes the design of Thane Heins system. He takes a large M-146 nanoperm toroid produced by Magnetec and winds approximately 300 feet of 16 awg insulated copper wire around it as tight as can be wound by hand. For those of you that are not familiar with various magnetic materials, nanoperm has a very high permeability. This is the secondary of his system.
The next step is to place a large, cold rolled steel shell around the secondary. One piece loosely fits on top of the nanoperm toroid and other piece fits loosely on the bottom. The two halves form a shell or primary toroid that encloses the secondary. The gap around the circumference is welded shut or sealed with epoxy. It is then wound with 400 feet of 16 awg copper "boat wire" (he just happened to have that kind of wire available). This is the primary of his system. Both the primary and secondary coils are wound in the same direction.
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!
http://pesn.com/2011/03/20/9501793_Two_Toroid_Over-Unity_Gabriel_Device_--_Part_1/ (http://pesn.com/2011/03/20/9501793_Two_Toroid_Over-Unity_Gabriel_Device_--_Part_1/)
You can read my comments to this in the Thane Heins thread here
Thane Heins BI-TOROID TRANSFORMER
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7833.msg278868#new
I will be attempting replication and am in contact with David Klingelhoefer. Exciting stuff.
Let's hope it's not a measurement error, but I have high hopes.
Cheers,
Feynman
OKay guys, good news! David wants to open-source this, and I'm in contact with him.
I'm posting here so we don't overwhelm him with the same questions over and over.
Apparently, Thane offered to help David patent it, which is really cool if true. Let's keep our fingers crossed that this device works as it appears (back-EMF magnetic flux modulation , possibly via differences in magnetic permeability).
----
Subject Re: The Gabriel Device Breakthrough
Sender David Klingelhoefer Add contact
Recipient feynman@feynmanslab.com Add contact
Date Today 20:13
To protect your privacy, remote images are blocked in this message. Display images
Hello Feynman,
1) I have attached a drawing I did; Can you confirm this is correct?
it is mostly correct your toaster is actually a snack master grill thing I picked up at good will for 6 bucks, it has a power usage of 750 watts but I could only get it to use 3.5 amps of that instead of the 6.5 it requires to run....(which is anomalous)
the connections look good, I would use more wire on your primary and secondary to combat the crash, in the neighbor hood of 800 to 1000 feet this will make a more stable reaction.
2) Maybe the reason the Nanoperm core is needed because of the really high
permeability, u =110,000. Why did you pick the M-146, and do you think
there is a better core?
I would think there would be a better core considering I chose this core for rodin coil experiments to which I completely gave up on. Although the things I found out about the rodin coil and my conduit Idea may make for a interesting contraption someday.
I would leave it up to the replicator to achieve a better standard than the crude version I built out of spare parts that I had lying around.
3) Can you explain more in detail what you tried in the unsuccessful
experiment with the 5" powdered iron core? Did you make a cold-rolled
steel shell for the powdered iron-core experiment?
it was unsuccessful because I was using a cylinder set in the center of the toroid it was a attempt to see if the fields are truly moving or if its something else since I couldn't make it transfer I chalk it up to me wasting my time when I already had something that worked. Make that work better than move to the conduit.
4) Do you think iron (instead of cold-rolled steel) will work for the
outer primary shell?
I selected Steel because of its high tesla rating that's the only reason the iron may work but I have no experience with that as of yet.
5) Could you provide a couple of more details on the primary/secondary
wire? I know both were 16AWG, but were they magnet wire, stranded, or
solid?
For that guy I used tinned copper wire on the outside that I had made in to twisted pair, the inner toroid was a solid insulated copper wire.
Reason for the insulation when or if you weld you may throw a spark inside your toroid then you will be S.O.L. if it melts a piece and fuses them together.
Although I have changed that up for the next version using enameled wire then a insulated layer on top of the 800 feet I have on there. This way the enameled wire is protected.
6) Did you weld the cold-rolled steel shell shut for your experiment?
Does welding vs. glue effect the power output?
I just spot welded the outside so I don't think it would matter at all. I plan on JB weld this time around. plan on heating from the secondary try and make a air gap in the center so it can breath.
make sure you get the M-416 not the M-146.
Oh lastly, is it okay if I publish your responses on overunity.com and/or
make a PDF? It might save you some headache because if this actually works
you are going to be getting the same questions over and over. :)
By all means push out all the info to everywhere under the sun and beyond.
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.
Dave
Open Source!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 2:22 PM, <feynman@feynmanslab.com> wrote:
Thanks David, for your prompt and detailed reply.
1) I have attached a drawing I did; Can you confirm this is correct?
2) Maybe the reason the Nanoperm core is needed because of the really high
permeability, u =110,000. Why did you pick the M-146, and do you think
there is a better core?
3) Can you explain more in detail what you tried in the unsuccessful
experiment with the 5" powdered iron core? Did you make a cold-rolled
steel shell for the powdered iron-core experiment?
4) Do you think iron (instead of cold-rolled steel) will work for the
outer primary shell?
5) Could you provide a couple of more details on the primary/secondary
wire? I know both were 16AWG, but were they magnet wire, stranded, or
solid?
6) Did you weld the cold-rolled steel shell shut for your experiment?
Does welding vs. glue effect the power output?
Thanks.
I will look more into how we can get an inexpensive source of outer-core
toroids, and maybe also for a source of cheaper inner-core material. I
will order a Nanoperm M-146 for my replication.
Oh lastly, is it okay if I publish your responses on overunity.com and/or
make a PDF? It might save you some headache because if this actually works
you are going to be getting the same questions over and over. :)
Sincerely,
"Feynman"
On Tue, 22 Mar 2011 13:48:12 -0500, David Klingelhoefer
<nebwindpower@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello Feynman,
>
> Ill address your questions and possible solutions to increase
performance,
> please understand im not a scientist or a engineer more of a tinkerer so
if
> I can't answer your questions completely please don't be offended or
think
> im holding anything back.
>
> The reason I gave this over to PESN is to open source, I have a plan of
my
> own on how to make money but it needs to be open sourced so we can get
off
> this crap of nukes and oil.
>
> 1) How are you making iron cores which 'fit' onto the toroid? Are
these
> custom or off-the-shelf? Do you have a supplier you are willing to
share?
> What is your opinion of various materials for the shell (iron vs steel
> etc)?
>
> These are custom pieces with expensive tooling of which I have already
> purchased, its a spun steel cold rolled shell approximately 17 awg, Im
> having a new piece made with thicker steel and hopefully if they can get
> the
> material have it be CRGO, as well it will be form fitting as you can see
> from the pictures I had to cut a major hole out of the center to fit the
> wire thru and I still ran out of room. If you want to purchase the shell
I
> have them made here in Kearney Nebraska from L&S industries 4100 East
39th
> Street Kearney, NE 68847-3987
> (308) 236-5853 you will want to talk to Jeff. the part is like 25 bucks
you
> will need two of them tho
>
> This is cheaply as I can make it, personally I would like to have it
> Stamped
> so there is less bending of the metal and removing of the magnetic
> properties.
>
> My hopes in changing to grain oriented steel and more primary wire we
can
> charge the outer shell with less power and keep a more stable reaction
in
> the secondary core.
>
> I have tried to make a conduit style one of these with a cylinder of
steel
> (primary) and a iron powder core (secondary) I couldn't get the voltages
to
> transfer so I put it on the shelf and went back to this design.
> although I haven't given up. Other thoughts are to make several Gabriels
> and
> shove a rod of sorts thru the center of them all for more magnetic
storage.
>
> 2) What is your opinion of nano-perm vs cheaper materials? For example,
a
> 6.5" OD powdered iron core toroid is only approx $48 from Micrometals
Inc.
> This is what Bob Boyce has been using in his various pulsed-DC
devices...
> for example the T650-52.
>
> I would stick with Nanoperm, Fetite, or Metglas all are amorphous alloys
> which will do very well.
> I think Fetite is manufactured in America Nanoperm is germany and
metglas
> is
> china I may be wrong.
>
> I had problems doing ac transfer with iron powder 5inch rings I may not
> have
> enough wire on the primary or its just built wrong
>
> 3) Have you tried making the system closed-loop? Any ideas on how to
> proceed with that? My ideas involve perhaps controlling the input power
/
> output power with an inexpensive programmable microcontroller such as an
> Arduino (approx $30, programmable in Java). Using a microcontroller
gives
> alot of experimental flexibility.
>
> Im not super into java and would have a learning curve for that I was
> thinking something a bit more simple, like a battery, inverter, and a
> battery charger on the secondary side.
> keep in mind if you try and close the loop directly the OU effect may
cause
> catastrophic failure due to a step up of voltage on the secondary side
> which
> would translate back to the primary and then back to the secondary so on
a
> so forth till meltdown.
>
> Some electronics would probably help with that but really I kept in mind
to
> have this come from the power company and back to the grid with excess
> power
> if the grid goes down then the transformer stops, which means its safe
for
> the lines man thats fixing the downed line. At which point a battery and
> inverter will get your electronics back up and running with continuous
> recharge.
>
> Feel free to spread the news on where to get the part if they need
> permission, I can call Jeff and have him source it out. I really don't
> think
> it would be a problem.
> The M-416 with about 1000feet of 16awg wire will fit perfectly in the
new
> part. Like a glove. you can then make your modifications IE a air gap in
> the
> center or drilling holes in the primary to give magnetic resistance ect
> ect...
>
> I hope I answered your questions and if you have more let me know
> Dave
>
> On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 1:09 PM, <feynman@feynmanslab.com> wrote:
>
>> Greetings Mr David Klingelhoefer ,
>>
>> My internet handle is Feynman, and I'm a poster at overunity.com,
>> overunityresearch.com, and overunity.org.uk.
>>
>> First, I want to contragulate you on your success, and I hoping your
>> results stand up to scrutiny -- which I think they will. This is by far
>> the
>> most promising OU device I've ever seen, and I've been doing this for
>> several years.
>>
>> I find it honorable you chose Gabriel as the name for your device, as
>> theologically he is the messenger of God the Creator for multiple
>> monotheistic religions. I pray that God has revealed to you something
>> which will be a gift to the world.
>>
>> I am interested in replication of your device, as it is obvious to me
>> what
>> a brilliant simplification it is of Heins' methods. I would like to
>> open-source the design in order to provide rapid global replication of
>> usable free-energy devices in the 500W-1kW range.
>>
>> To dispense with formalities, I'll get straight to some questions:
>>
>> 1) How are you making iron cores which 'fit' onto the toroid? Are
these
>> custom or off-the-shelf? Do you have a supplier you are willing to
>> share?
>> What is your opinion of various materials for the shell (iron vs steel
>> etc)?
>>
>> 2) What is your opinion of nano-perm vs cheaper materials? For
example,
>> a
>> 6.5" OD powdered iron core toroid is only approx $48 from Micrometals
>> Inc.
>> This is what Bob Boyce has been using in his various pulsed-DC
devices...
>> for example the T650-52.
>>
>> http://www.micrometals.com/parts_index.html
>>
>> 3) Have you tried making the system closed-loop? Any ideas on how to
>> proceed with that? My ideas involve perhaps controlling the input
power
>> /
>> output power with an inexpensive programmable microcontroller such as
an
>> Arduino (approx $30, programmable in Java). Using a microcontroller
>> gives
>> alot of experimental flexibility.
>> http://arduino.cc
>> source: http://sparkfun.com
>>
>> Sincerely,
>> "Feynman" / Washington DC
>>
>>
>> P.S. Attached is the post which I made to overunity.com upon reading
>> about
>> your device earlier today.
>>
>> http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7833.msg278860#msg278860
>>
>> 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.
>>
>>
>> Quote
>>
>> 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.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
Attached is an diagram of the Heins' effect. If the toroid version by David Klingelhoefer is confirmed, it would be the toroidal analogy of the Heins effect.
You can read more about the Heins effect in Chapter 3 of Free Energy devices.
http://www.free-energy-info.co.uk/Chapter3.pdf (http://www.free-energy-info.co.uk/Chapter3.pdf)
Okay, talking to my friend on the phone, who works with iron and steel in his forge. He's a blacksmith, an expert at working with metals; he actually once made a metal flower out of copper. He makes other things like swords, transformers, whatever.
The outer steel shell for the Gabriel primary: The hard way
My blacksmith friend suggests that you can get steel-core 'donuts' (toroids) from exhaust systems for cars -- up to 9" in diameter. The material is usually galvanized steel, sometimes iron.
Occasionally they can come aluminum-plated or zinc-plated (galvanized). He says you can uncoat a coated (galvanized) toroid by sticking in charcoal fire for about 30 - 40 minutes. Just let it burn off but don't breathe it he says. Use a P100 mask with charcoal filter (one intended for chemical vapors) so you don't breathe the burning zinc fumes. Apparently galvanized steel fumes are really toxic, so be careful.
Anyway, So this method turns a galvanized / coated steel toroid into a un-galvanized steel toroid, according to my friend.
You can also get rid of the coating of galvanized coating (zinc) steel or aluminum coated steel, by putting it in Draino (NaOH), apparently to get rid of the coating. You'd have to keep it in there until it stops bubbling (it bubbles off hydrogen).
You can get these exhaust donuts uncoated by going to an exhaust shop. You just tell them you need to weld it, so they will give you welding steel donut rather than galvanized steel.
You can cut the exhaust donut in half by using a dremel with a cutoff wheel, but he says this is tricky. A lathe would also work.
My friend also says, Make sure not to weld a galvanized (zinc-coated) one unless you remove the coating. Welding galvanized steel is toxic. If you are going to weld, you just want regular iron or steel. But yeah, there are places to get nice non-galvanized steel toroids for car exhausts that should fit, the only question is the magnetic permeability / properties.
http://www.mazdatrix.com/getprice.asp?partnum=40-0610-1114 (http://www.mazdatrix.com/getprice.asp?partnum=40-0610-1114)
http://www.mazdatrix.com/e7.htm (http://www.mazdatrix.com/e7.htm)
Also, Search for 'exhaust donuts' on google images if you want to make the outer toroid from a car part.
The outer steel shell for the Gabriel primary: The easy way
Order it off-the-shelf from where David gets it.
Nice find and great to see the open source being allowed. Toroid concept is something I have always thought had potential for OU.
Hi All,
I have done a BiTT of research, pun well intended. If I may make a recommendation of something I will be trying with my replication... high perm material on the inner core is crucial, of course, but the outer core need not be this difficult. One can set iron powder, iron filings, magnetite, etc in a resin, and cast the outer core around the wound inner core. A drill press and/or grinder may be necessary to put the finish shape on it after the resin has set.
Cheers,
Twinbeard
Also: David confirmed to me the Nanoperm toroid he uses for the secondary is a Nanoperm M-416, not M-146 as mentioned in the PESN article.
I have them made here in Kearney Nebraska from L&S industries
4100 East 39th Street Kearney, NE 68847-3987
(308) 236-5853 you will want to talk to Jeff. the part is like 25 bucks you
will need two of them tho.
You can select your metal as well.
The tooling has been paid for... so just order it. no need to make it hard.
The M-416 with about 1000feet of 16awg wire will fit perfectly in the new part. "Like a glove."
You can select your metal as well.
The tooling has been paid for... so just order it. no need to make it hard.
Mav
QuoteI have done a BiTT of research, pun well intended. If I may make a recommendation of something I will be trying with my replication... high perm material on the inner core is crucial, of course, but the outer core need not be this difficult. One can set iron powder, iron filings, magnetite, etc in a resin, and cast the outer core around the wound inner core. A drill press and/or grinder may be necessary to put the finish shape on it after the resin has set.
That's a great idea... have you confirmed that it works? I'm just wondering out loud, because perhaps there might be something needed in terms resistivity (or lack thereof) in the material?
Also what do you plan on using as a 'form' so you get a good shaped outer toroid?
Thanks,
Feynman
Hi,
You must be the inventor. Nice work, and a pleasure to meet you. I understand... you are making it totally easy for replication with essentially off the shelf parts, in the interest of exact replication and independent verification. Very admirable. You may find some interested parties here, however, for whom the expense or hassle in freight and customs may be burdensome.
The permeability gradient between the two core materials is the critical factor here. High permeability on the secondary (inner) core and low permeability on the primary (outer) core. This is what prevents the flux induced in the secondary from returning to the primary. The coils need to be tuned properly as well, of course, to reach optimal conditions, but there is a wider tuning band available in your device, I would propose, than in the BiTT, as respects the coils.
My recommendation as to casting is not so tough... some fiberglass or epoxy resin, and some powdered ferrous material. It may make this project accessible to a wider group of people, and an improvement in terms of magnetic coupling between primary core and secondary windings may be achieved this way as well.
Just my $.02.
Cheers and well done!
Twinbeard
Quote from: Mavendex on March 22, 2011, 05:39:49 PM
I have them made here in Kearney Nebraska from L&S industries
4100 East 39th Street Kearney, NE 68847-3987
(308) 236-5853 you will want to talk to Jeff. the part is like 25 bucks you
will need two of them tho.
You can select your metal as well.
The tooling has been paid for... so just order it. no need to make it hard.
The M-416 with about 1000feet of 16awg wire will fit perfectly in the new part. "Like a glove."
You can select your metal as well.
The tooling has been paid for... so just order it. no need to make it hard.
Mav
Quote from: Feynman on March 22, 2011, 05:44:33 PM
That's a great idea... have you confirmed that it works? I'm just wondering out loud, because perhaps there might be something needed in terms resistivity (or lack thereof) in the material?
Also what do you plan on using as a 'form' so you get a good shaped outer toroid?
Thanks,
Feynman
Actually making the form would be a good part of the work if you're going to do this. I think the simplest is to just to go with the existing tooling that is available as mentioned by Mav.
The exhaust donut might be a good option to try if you have the equipment to make a clean cut.
/Wayne
Great posts. However, I see a wiring mistake.
Take a look at the toaster. The toaster is NOT in series with the toroid.
The BLUE wire from the toroid not only goes to the toaster, but it also goes directly to the wall outlet.
The way the diagram is drawn, the toaster is NOT in series with the toroid.
Can someone contact the originator to see what he has to say?
Thank you.
.
Quote from: Feynman on March 22, 2011, 05:44:33 PM
That's a great idea... have you confirmed that it works?
Thank you.
We have made cores with this process, yes, but not in this geometrical configuration. I am planning on doing so tho:) I will put together a vid of making it, but it may take me a bit of time... I am overloaded at the moment.
Quote from: Feynman on March 22, 2011, 05:44:33 PM
I'm just wondering out loud, because perhaps there might be something needed in terms resistivity (or lack thereof) in the material?
Like I said 1 post back... it is the gradient of permeability between the cores.
Quote from: Feynman on March 22, 2011, 05:44:33 PM
Also what do you plan on using as a 'form' so you get a good shaped outer toroid?
Thanks,
Feynman
I had not really thought of that so much... one of those toy donuts people wind rodin coils on perhaps.
Maybe just a straight cylinder, with the wound secondary core immersed, then drill, rout, and grind to shape.
Cheers,
Twinbeard
Yep, I got my last set of 6 Fischer-Price toroid forms from a yard sale for $1. :) Common yard sale item as the kids don't use them long. I think Twinbeard has a good idea here too worth exploring but since the original concept is what works either way is probably well worth exploring.
Welcome Mavendex! Glad to see you here. I really like the concept you have here of a toroid inside a toroid. I think it is something like this which will eventually make Free energy a reality. Just a feeling ...
I started typing a long message here a few minutes ago and lost it when I had to get up for a few minutes - hate it when that happens. I'm not starting over on it but look forward to following this and trying some things. I think it will be most important to try this with a power supply of some sort where you don't need to use a toaster or similar to reduce current. Would it be possible to test your setup with a small AC transformer like a 12 volt AC wall transformer to eliminate the toaster or grill? If you would be able to still get a power increase to output to some 12 volt bulbs (might need a diode but probably would work without) like car headlights. That would be very encouraging. You probably have a very good sense on where you are going with this so I don't want to sidetrack you but I think it may be good to eliminate the toaster part if possible. Thanks much for choosing to open source as many here have seen all attempts to patent or get investors inevitably seems to fail to get a device out to the public. It's a lot safer too.
Quote from: twinbeard on March 22, 2011, 06:16:00 PM
Hi,
You must be the inventor. Nice work, and a pleasure to meet you. I understand... you are making it totally easy for replication with essentially off the shelf parts, in the interest of exact replication and independent verification. Very admirable. You may find some interested parties here, however, for whom the expense or hassle in freight and customs may be burdensome.
The permeability gradient between the two core materials is the critical factor here. High permeability on the secondary (inner) core and low permeability on the primary (outer) core. This is what prevents the flux induced in the secondary from returning to the primary. The coils need to be tuned properly as well, of course, to reach optimal conditions, but there is a wider tuning band available in your device, I would propose, than in the BiTT, as respects the coils.
My recommendation as to casting is not so tough... some fiberglass or epoxy resin, and some powdered ferrous material. It may make this project accessible to a wider group of people, and an improvement in terms of magnetic coupling between primary core and secondary windings may be achieved this way as well.
Just my $.02.
Cheers and well done!
Twinbeard
Aye, Im just trying to help everyone get a good result is all plus new ideas is what makes it better and better and better.
with a light weight power source anything is pretty much possible.
Mav
Instead of using a toaster in series to reduce the voltage to the Toroid, how about using a
$6 Light Dimmer. Or for an Inductive Load, a person could use the kind of Dimmer that
controls the speed of Ceiling Fans.
.
Incandescent lights only as it says on it. Just blow it out
and so a waste of money.
thay
@ Thaelin, Incandescent lights only as it says on it. Just blow it out and so a waste of money.
============================================================================
I have used Light Dimmers to control TRANSFORMERS NUMEROUS times and the Dimmer has NEVER burned out.
Don't guess about it. It only costs $6 to try it yourself. IT WORKS FOR ME!!
.
This is little more that a rheostat, correct? Or is there something else in there?
@Fatbird
Quote
However, I see a wiring mistake.
Take a look at the toaster. The toaster is NOT in series with the toroid.
The BLUE wire from the toroid not only goes to the toaster, but it also goes directly to the wall outlet.
The way the diagram is drawn, the toaster is NOT in series with the toroid.
Can someone contact the originator to see what he has to say?
-Fatbird
The diagram was made to my best understanding of this device at-present. I only learned about this device today. There may be errors in my diagram, which I made from the description in the PESN article -- if there are errors I will update the diagram to version 1.1. I think you might be right , particularly if the toaster is supposed to be in series.
If this is true, then the blue wire coming out of the purple toroid primary should actually be labeled 'red' as hot, which should then connect down to the toaster's hot lead directly; the toaster's neutral lead should then thus connect back to the surge suppressor neutral plug with a blue wire.
Before publishing it, I send it to David (the inventor) for review. He said it was correct , here are his exact words:
Quote
"
1) I have attached a drawing I did; Can you confirm this is correct?"
-Feynman
Quoteit is mostly correct your toaster is actually a snack master grill thing I picked up at good will for 6 bucks, it has a power usage of 750 watts but I could only get it to use 3.5 amps of that instead of the 6.5 it requires to run....(which is anomalous)
the connections look good, I would use more wire on your primary and secondary to combat the crash, in the neighbor hood of 800 to 1000 feet this will make a more stable reaction.
-David (the inventor)
I will update the diagram tomorrow, since I think you might be right FatBird, that the toaster should be in series with the primary. We'll look into it.
Quote
Instead of using a toaster in series to reduce the voltage to the Toroid, how about using a
$6 Light Dimmer. Or for an Inductive Load, a person could use the kind of Dimmer that
controls the speed of Ceiling Fans.
I don't think the purpose was to reduce the voltage to toroid primary; I think it was to
limit current through the toroid primary to prevent damage to the primary windings. On top of this, if the primary draw current exceeds the surge suppressor limit (whatever that is), then the surge suppressor's internal circuit breaker should trip , preventing the windings from starting a fire if they exceed the power strip's ampere limit. Frying your windings sucks, especially since they are tedious to do!
Anyway I will review this carefully, talk to David , and post an updated experimental schematic of that image tomorrow mid-day. Feel free to update and post your interpretation of the schematic , and we'll review it with David as we go.
Sincerely,
Feynman
Light dimmers use an SCR and a few other components usually beside the potentiometer. It's not just a Rheostat. Like Fatbird says they are cheap as they are very common and are a neat way to control power for some things. However I think the output is pulsed DC isn't it Fatbird? So it may or may not work for this device.
Quote from: Feynman on March 22, 2011, 09:49:29 PM
@Fatbird
Before publishing it, I send it to David (the inventor) for review. He said it was correct , here are his exact words:
I will update the diagram tomorrow, since I think you might be right FatBird, that the toaster should be in series with the primary. We'll look into it.
I would think that its acting as a current limiting resistor. If so, a beefy rheostat should do the job. Something like this:
http://cgi.ebay.com/LARGE-OHMITE-250-OHM-RHEOSTAT-2-SHAFT-/400117815200
although perhaps a different impedance value. What is the impedance of the toaster? :)
***edit***
just read your last post, e2matrix. SCR too? that should be scalable with the rheostat to the proper voltage and current levels, eh?
Cheers,
Twinbeard
The input to the device is 120VAC 60hz, the output from the device is 120VAC 60hz -- just at higher amperage. From what I understand, the winding ratios are 1:1 so the voltage stays the same. I don't know the phase relationship between the input and output phase, but I assume it's probably standard consistent with a toroidal current transformer, so just look that up until we can get scope traces.
The only thing 'special' from what I can tell so far is we are canceling the back-EMF via Heins method by exploiting a difference in magnetic permeability. The forward EMF magnetic flux goes into the high-permeability nanoperm core, the back-EMF magnetic flux stays in the outer core. That statement may be subject to change , but that's how I understand it at the moment.
That said, an SCR seems to be a good idea for controlling input.
hello all,
if you are looking for donut bends then go here:
http://www.google.de/images?um=1&hl=de&tbm=isch&sa=1&q=donut+mandrel+bends&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=
Mav
Quote:
Aye, Im just trying to help everyone get a good result is all plus new ideas is what makes it better and better and better.
with a light weight power source anything is pretty much possible.
Mav
-----------------------------
Mav
The stuff dreams are made of [light weight power ]!
Thanks a million for your efforts here!
Of course Wayne and Feynman also!
Chet
I'll correct what I said earlier about light dimmers. They use either SCR's or Triac's and rather than pulsed DC I believe they use chopped AC. Think of a sine wave with vertical sections of it chopped out. So more like pulsed AC. Having refreshed my memory on that it looks like it could have very interesting uses since it's slamming the power on and off suddenly in a way that looks like it will create vibrations and perhaps back EMF in some cases. I remember how some light bulb filaments would vibrate from a dimmer that was turned way down.
Quote from: ramset on March 22, 2011, 10:40:56 PM
Mav
Quote:
Aye, Im just trying to help everyone get a good result is all plus new ideas is what makes it better and better and better.
with a light weight power source anything is pretty much possible.
Mav
-----------------------------
Mav
The stuff dreams are made of [light weight power ]!
Thanks a million for your efforts here!
Of course Wayne and Feynman also!
Chet
hey Chet
Who is Mav?
Mags
Mags
This is Mav [Mavendex post 7 and 14 this thread]
Quote:
I have them made here in Kearney Nebraska from L&S industries
4100 East 39th Street Kearney, NE 68847-3987
(308) 236-5853 you will want to talk to Jeff. the part is like 25 bucks you
will need two of them tho.
You can select your metal as well.
The tooling has been paid for... so just order it. no need to make it hard.
The M-416 with about 1000feet of 16awg wire will fit perfectly in the new part. "Like a glove."
You can select your metal as well.
The tooling has been paid for... so just order it. no need to make it hard.
Mav
-------------
The Inventer.
Chet
Just a remark on open sourcing this.
It's absolutely nice that the inventor wants to share this, but keep in mind that Thane's patent may still be applicable here.
So, if this one is successful, be aware of that.
I've been looking a bit more in detail how the device is suppose to work, and I don't believe this device works according to Thane's approach. To avoid the BEMF to the primary, Thane's approach was to move some of the magnetic flux from the secondary to a separate core (the secondary core). This requires that the secondary coil be wound over the 2 cores as pictured above. If you look at the Garbriel device, it is exactly the opposite; it is the primary core that encapsulates the 2 cores concentrically. According to Faraday's law, the magnetic flux from the secondary coil will impact and generate a BEMF in the primary coil since the primary coil turns are wrapped over the secondary core also.
If we were to apply Thane's approach to the toroid configuration, the primary and secondary coils would be switched (i.e. the primary on the inside toroid), and the higher permeability core on the outside also. In this way the outside secondary core would absorb most of the secondary flux and not impact on the interior primary coil to generate the BEMF.
Assuming we can replicate the results, it may be a lot tougher to explain how the device works, lol! If anyone sees something wrong in the analysis, let me know.
/Wayne
I got the following info from Magnetec:
"
We are pleased to quote as follows:
EMC-Core M-416
1-24 pc. ............ 140,00 EUR/pc.
(See attached file: M-416-01S_prel.pdf)
Sales conditions
Lead time: 10 pcs. from stock, otherwise about 12-14 weeks
Delivery: ex works (neither you tell us forwarder account or we will bill
transport costs of about 150 EUR - depends on weight)
Payment: in advance
"
Anyone have any experience with shipping from Germany. The shipping cost of 150 EUR seems a bit high. Anyone know a shipping method / company that is more cost effective?
/Wayne
they are just telling you its 150 euro for the core not for the shipping, they ship DHL and they don't speak super awesome English.
Shipping depends on the weight its about 2 lbs
Mav
@ e2matrix, 'll correct what I said earlier about light dimmers. They use either SCR's or Triac's and rather than pulsed DC I believe they use chopped AC. Think of a sine wave with vertical sections of it chopped out. So more like pulsed AC. Having refreshed my memory on that it looks like it could have very interesting uses since it's slamming the power on and off suddenly in a way that looks like it will create vibrations and perhaps back EMF in some cases. I remember how some light bulb filaments would vibrate from a dimmer that was turned way down.
===============================================================================================
Yes, Light Dimmers use Triacs instead of SCRs. A Triac conducts in BOTH directions, but an SCR only conducts in 1 direction.
As e2matrix says above, the Chopped AC may work better than plain AC because the Chppped AC produces HARMONICS that
help things out. For only $6 or $7 it is an inexpensive way to control the current. PLUS, a toaster can still be used in SERIES
with the Dimmer for extra protection as an OVERCURRENT protector if desired.
.
Wayne
Just for clarity,Your price quote is on the same Part as this?
Mav
Quote:
I have them made here in Kearney Nebraska from L&S industries
4100 East 39th Street Kearney, NE 68847-3987
(308) 236-5853 you will want to talk to Jeff. the part is like 25 bucks you
will need two of them tho.
You can select your metal as well.
The tooling has been paid for... so just order it. no need to make it hard.
The M-416 with about 1000feet of 16awg wire will fit perfectly in the new part. "Like a glove."
You can select your metal as well.
The tooling has been paid for... so just order it. no need to make it hard.
----------------
25.00 bucks?
The way the US dollar is going ,That'll probably cost YOU [Euro] 4 cents?
Chet
Quote from: ramset on March 23, 2011, 09:01:42 AM
Wayne
Just for clarity,Your price quote is on the same Part as this?
Mav
Quote:
I have them made here in Kearney Nebraska from L&S industries
4100 East 39th Street Kearney, NE 68847-3987
(308) 236-5853 you will want to talk to Jeff. the part is like 25 bucks you
will need two of them tho.
You can select your metal as well.
The tooling has been paid for... so just order it. no need to make it hard.
The M-416 with about 1000feet of 16awg wire will fit perfectly in the new part. "Like a glove."
You can select your metal as well.
The tooling has been paid for... so just order it. no need to make it hard.
----------------
25.00 bucks?
The way the US dollar is going ,That'll probably cost YOU [Euro] 4 cents?
Chet
No, The shipping quote of 150 EURO for the M-416 core from Magnetecs is to Canada (I'm based in Montreal). We're only about 2 cents above par $US.:)
I'm checking with DHL.. seems the cheapest to NA.
Just a few suggestions for the mild steel toroid that covers the secondary. Do you think steel wire would work? Or wrapping with a long thin strip of sheet metal, this would be a bit quicker for knocking out a test device.
Quote from: Mavendex on March 23, 2011, 08:32:11 AM
they are just telling you its 150 euro for the core not for the shipping, they ship DHL and they don't speak super awesome English.
Shipping depends on the weight its about 2 lbs
Mav
Are you saying it's 150 EURO including the shipping?
@FatBird
Thanks for the info on triacs / SCRs. If we can figure out the input/output phase relationships with the AC (they are in phase) and we can do proper current limiting with a fuse, maybe it will be possible to do closed loop mode without complicated electronics.
16 awg is max 22 amps for chassis wiring, and 3.7 amps for power transmission. So maybe fuse the primary with a 10 or 20amp fuse?
http://www.powerstream.com/Wire_Size.htm (http://www.powerstream.com/Wire_Size.htm)
If I manage to get a replication of the effect I'll probably scope the input and output phase to make sure we know the phase relationships.
@all
I called up Jeff at L&S Industries yesterday, but he didn't seem to recognize the part I was asking about (the rolled steel half-toroid). I sent him a couple of pictures and I'm going to call him back to today.
As for the M-416 toroid, I was planning on ordering that today as well. We'll see how good my German is, haha. Maybe I'll Google translate "I want to order the M-416 toroid please; I am a dumb American take my money"
MAGNETEC Webshop
http://www.magnetec.de/shop/show.php?main_kat=&kategorie=5&start=60&nr=
EU members:
Prices include packaging and shipment costs.
Without given VAT No. german taxes will be charged.
Non EU members:
Europe: Minimum order value EUR 30,00 plus 30,00 EUR shipment costs per order.
Others: Minimum order value EUR 60,00 plus 40,00 EUR shipment costs per order.
Quote from: Feb2006 on March 23, 2011, 11:14:51 AM
MAGNETEC Webshop
http://www.magnetec.de/shop/show.php?main_kat=&kategorie=5&start=60&nr=
EU members:
Prices include packaging and shipment costs.
Without given VAT No. german taxes will be charged.
Non EU members:
Europe: Minimum order value EUR 30,00 plus 30,00 EUR shipment costs per order.
Others: Minimum order value EUR 60,00 plus 40,00 EUR shipment costs per order.
Thanks.. this turned out to be the easiest way to order.
It might be worth considering for those in the U.S. to look at Metglas.com to see if they have an equivalent for the M-416. Metglas is a quality manufacturer of high permeability toroid cores as well as other related things and have been used by numerous energy researchers. It would likely save a lot on shipping as well as possible cost savings due to dollar conversion. And keep the $$ in the U.S.
Quote from: Feynman on March 23, 2011, 10:51:11 AM
@FatBird
Thanks for the info on triacs / SCRs. If we can figure out the input/output phase relationships with the AC (they are in phase) and we can do proper current limiting with a fuse, maybe it will be possible to do closed loop mode without complicated electronics.
16 awg is max 22 amps for chassis wiring, and 3.7 amps for power transmission. So maybe fuse the primary with a 10 or 20amp fuse?
http://www.powerstream.com/Wire_Size.htm (http://www.powerstream.com/Wire_Size.htm)
If I manage to get a replication of the effect I'll probably scope the input and output phase to make sure we know the phase relationships.
@all
I called up Jeff at L&S Industries yesterday, but he didn't seem to recognize the part I was asking about (the rolled steel half-toroid). I sent him a couple of pictures and I'm going to call him back to today.
As for the M-416 toroid, I was planning on ordering that today as well. We'll see how good my German is, haha. Maybe I'll Google translate "I want to order the M-416 toroid please; I am a dumb American take my money"
I just called him and told him its ok, to open source this. hes cool with it and is in the process of getting my tooling modified for the form fitting piece.
Quote from: e2matrix on March 23, 2011, 11:59:46 AM
It might be worth considering for those in the U.S. to look at Metglas.com to see if they have an equivalent for the M-416. Metglas is a quality manufacturer of high permeability toroid cores as well as other related things and have been used by numerous energy researchers. It would likely save a lot on shipping as well as possible cost savings due to dollar conversion. And keep the $$ in the U.S.
I tried, but couldn't find an exact match.
@Mav
Thanks for letting Jeff know. I'll call him today.
I just called Magnetec, yeah, they say use the web store. Talking on the phone with them was hillarious! The answered the phone in German but they spoke English. I had to slow down my rapid-talking American East Coast accent so they could understand me. They were really friendly btw.
Use the Vebb Store for ordering! ;) They said that's the easiest way. They also take International money wire and Paypal, so you can also do email orders that way.
Anyway, I ordered an M-416 (150 Euro) and an M-412 (50 Euro). After ordering and selecting Paypal, the total was 240 Euro, so the total for the two cores was $348 with shipping.
The M-412 is just a smaller version of the M-416, but has similar specs (permeability, saturation, etc). I'm going to use the M-416 as a production unit , and the M-412 for general experiments. If this whole thing turns out to be a bust (measurement error or something), I can re-use these cores for other toroidal power experiments like the Boyce TPU replication.
But I honestly think we've got something here, or else I wouldn't be so eager to drop $350 on Nanoperm cores. Worst case , the cores can be reused for HV pulsed DC experiments.
Oh also, the woman I spoke to on the phone at Magnetec, Diana, said you can probably substitute the M-116 if they run out of stock of the M-416 (it's the same size, just of slightly differing permeability (M-116 is approx. double the permeability, half the saturation level)
Here's the specs of their "Universal" cores:
http://www.magnetec.de/eng/universal-kerne1.htm (http://www.magnetec.de/eng/universal-kerne1.htm)
@wayne, @e2matrix
Can you link me to the Metglas toroidal material / core that you think most closely matches David's Nanoperm core? You guys probably know more about these specs than I do, I'm learning as I go here...
Quote from: wayne49s on March 23, 2011, 07:13:28 AM
I've been looking a bit more in detail how the device is suppose to work, and I don't believe this device works according to Thane's approach. To avoid the BEMF to the primary, Thane's approach was to move some of the magnetic flux from the secondary to a separate core (the secondary core). This requires that the secondary coil be wound over the 2 cores as pictured above. If you look at the Garbriel device, it is exactly the opposite; it is the primary core that encapsulates the 2 cores concentrically. According to Faraday's law, the magnetic flux from the secondary coil will impact and generate a BEMF in the primary coil since the primary coil turns are wrapped over the secondary core also.
If we were to apply Thane's approach to the toroid configuration, the primary and secondary coils would be switched (i.e. the primary on the inside toroid), and the higher permeability core on the outside also. In this way the outside secondary core would absorb most of the secondary flux and not impact on the interior primary coil to generate the BEMF.
Assuming we can replicate the results, it may be a lot tougher to explain how the device works, lol! If anyone sees something wrong in the analysis, let me know.
/Wayne
Hi Wayne,
I'll have a look at his claims just to make sure.
I am not sure I understand the meaning of the primary core, the metal donut shell.
If I am correct this can be a plastic shell as well? Maybe even preferred....
@Feynman
I just did a cursory internet scan..didn't find any that had the right fit for the outer shell. Figure it was best to validate with the same cores first, but here's one that has also some large toroids for future reference:
http://www.hilltech.com/products/power_components/amorphous_nanocrystalline_cores.html
Quote from: wayne49s on March 23, 2011, 07:13:28 AM
I've been looking a bit more in detail how the device is suppose to work, and I don't believe this device works according to Thane's approach. To avoid the BEMF to the primary, Thane's approach was to move some of the magnetic flux from the secondary to a separate core (the secondary core). This requires that the secondary coil be wound over the 2 cores as pictured above. If you look at the Garbriel device, it is exactly the opposite; it is the primary core that encapsulates the 2 cores concentrically. According to Faraday's law, the magnetic flux from the secondary coil will impact and generate a BEMF in the primary coil since the primary coil turns are wrapped over the secondary core also.
If we were to apply Thane's approach to the toroid configuration, the primary and secondary coils would be switched (i.e. the primary on the inside toroid), and the higher permeability core on the outside also. In this way the outside secondary core would absorb most of the secondary flux and not impact on the interior primary coil to generate the BEMF.
Assuming we can replicate the results, it may be a lot tougher to explain how the device works, lol! If anyone sees something wrong in the analysis, let me know.
/Wayne
You make some great points... for me, the fact that Thane was in contact and was enthusiastic about David's device suggests to me maybe Thane has a deeper understanding than he did previously.
I think the first thing we need to do is bench this thing out to make sure we've actually got anomalous phenomenon. It's promising, but we don't have a replication yet. If we can get a successful replication, then we can try to make theories to predict the anomaly. Because it's not science unless it can be replicated. So that's why I've taken the plunge on the expense.
Since we're all going to be waiting a few weeks anyway for parts to arrive, it probably wouldn't hurt to speculate. Assuming the Gabriel device is working as claimed, my 'explanation' for it would be that the primary somehow induces magnetic flux in the secondary (proportional to the rate of change in 'current'), with the back-EMF somehow trapped in the primary shell. That's one vague idea.
Another related idea, in terms of the secondary magnetic flux inducing back-EMF into the primary, maybe this is stopped because the metal shell acts as a 'Faraday cage' of some sort, a sort of "one-way" mirror for magnetic flux.
My last speculation to consider is that if properly done, the vast majority of magnetic flux in the secondary is going to stay inside the Nanoperm core, particularly in one of these high-permeability toroids (besides the leakage flux). So again, perhaps it's the combination of the really high magnetic permeability of the core combined with the 'Faraday-cage' like properties of the steel shell. How it works exactly I have no clue, but these are my thoughts at the moment anyway.
Let's keep our fingers crossed...
P.S. Also I think it's important also to factor in the material resistivity
Quote from: teslaalset on March 23, 2011, 12:43:28 PM
Hi Wayne,
I'll have a look at his claims just to make sure.
I am not sure I understand the meaning of the primary core, the metal donut shell.
If I am correct this can be a plastic shell as well? Maybe even preferred....
Hi Tesla,
If it is a plastic shell, then it has no magnetic significance. Then it magnetically reduces to a standard toroid with 2 windings which wouldn't account for the power gain. It may take a while to figure how this thing works.
These look like they'd be useful for experiments, but not sure about the replication...
Quote
MagnaPerm® High Permeability Cores
These cores are manufactured with cobalt-based Metglas amorphous alloy 2714AF for high frequency applications. Theses flat loop toroidal cores offer a unique combination of ultra-high permeability, high saturation flux density and extremely low core loss for electronic component designers.
http://www.hilltech.com/products/power_components/amorphous_nanocrystalline_cores.html#MagnaPerm (http://www.hilltech.com/products/power_components/amorphous_nanocrystalline_cores.html#MagnaPerm)
Hi Mavendex and all,
sorry if this has been mentioned already but it seems very crucial to me. About the primary donut, I've heard iron and steel, that's a BIG difference. Is this primary core magnetic material or not?
thanks,
Mario
Quote from: e2matrix on March 23, 2011, 11:59:46 AM
It might be worth considering for those in the U.S. to look at Metglas.com to see if they have an equivalent for the M-416. Metglas is a quality manufacturer of high permeability toroid cores as well as other related things and have been used by numerous energy researchers. It would likely save a lot on shipping as well as possible cost savings due to dollar conversion. And keep the $$ in the U.S.
One could likely cut and stack these as well: ultraperm 80, permeability 400K
http://www.goldmine-elec-products.com/prodinfo.asp?number=G16600A
Cheers,
Twinbeard
Quote from: popolibero on March 23, 2011, 01:15:19 PM
Hi Mavendex and all,
sorry if this has been mentioned already but it seems very crucial to me. About the primary donut, I've heard iron and steel, that's a BIG difference. Is this primary core magnetic material or not?
thanks,
Mario
Its cold rolled steel, I'm trying to get L&S to find CRGO steel to increase the tesla rating in the primary, I wish we could make it out of that graphene stuff but thats a long long way off..
mav
@all
I noticed that these Nanoperm guys are rating their magnetic permeability u, as "18.000" for the M-416 core. Some of their cores have claimed permeability up to "u = 100.000"
Magnetec Nanoperm Specs
http://www.magnetec.de/eng/universal-kerne1.htm (http://www.magnetec.de/eng/universal-kerne1.htm)
Shouldn't that decimal be a comma?! I think that means relative permeability u_r=100,000 in American, right? ;) Because I saw a site that claims Nanoperm is up to 5 times as permeable as T38 ferrite, and T38 ferrite has a permeability u_i of around 10,000.
http://www.epcos.com/web/generator/Web/Sections/ProductCatalog/Ferrites/Materials/PDF/PDF__T38,property=Data__en.pdf;/PDF_T38.pdf (http://www.epcos.com/web/generator/Web/Sections/ProductCatalog/Ferrites/Materials/PDF/PDF__T38,property=Data__en.pdf;/PDF_T38.pdf)
Material / Relative Permeability (u/u0)
NanoPerm / 10,000-100,000 (?)
Mu-metal / 20,000-50,000
Ferrite (T38) / 10,000
Permalloy / 8,000
Electrical steel / 4,000
Ferrite (nickel zinc) / 16-640
Ferrite (magnanese zinc) / >640
Steel / 100
Concrete / 1
Air / 1.000000037
Vacuum / 1
Water / 0.999992
Superconductors / 0.000
source:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_permeability (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_permeability)
----
The other question I have is the resistivity of this Nanoperm stuff vs the cold-rolled steel. David, did you ever test the electrical resistance of the Nanoperm core material?
Nanoperm supposedly has a resistivity of 115 microOhm x cm, which is equivalent to 1.15 x 10^-6 Ohm x meters.
http://online.unitconverterpro.com/unit-conversion/convert-
alpha/convert.php?cat=resistivity (http://online.unitconverterpro.com/unit-conversion/convert-%3Cbr%20/%3Ealpha/convert.php?cat=resistivity)
Let's compare Nanoperm's resistivity to other materials, for example the outer cold-rolled steel shell....
Nanoperm is 10x to 100x less conductive than conductors such as silver and copper, and probably 10x less conductive than cold-rolled steel shell. However, if this is correct, this means Nanoperm is ~10,000x more electrically conductive than ferrite, even though it has higher magnetic permeability than ferrite. This may be an important property should this experiment be replicated.
Material vs Resistivity
Silver 1.59×10âˆ'8 Ohm Meters
Copper 1.68×10âˆ'8 Ohm Meters
Aluminium 2.82×10âˆ'8 Ohm Meters
Steel (cast) 1.61x10-7 Ohm Meters
Iron 1.0×10âˆ'7 Ohm Meters
Nanoperm 1.15x10-6 Ohm Meters
Carbon (graphite) 3.0×10âˆ'3
Sea water 2×10âˆ'1
Ferrite (T38) 1.0x10-1 Ohm Meters
Silicon 6.40×10^2
Rubber 1x10^13
Teflon 1x10^22
sources:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resistivity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resistivity)
http://www.feryster.pl/polski/nanoperm.php?lang=en (http://www.feryster.pl/polski/nanoperm.php?lang=en)
http://hypertextbook.com/facts/2006/UmranUgur.shtml (http://hypertextbook.com/facts/2006/UmranUgur.shtml)
http://www.epcos.com/web/generator/Web/Sections/ProductCatalog/Ferrites/Materials/PDF/PDF__T38,property=Data__en.pdf;/PDF_T38.pdf (http://www.epcos.com/web/generator/Web/Sections/ProductCatalog/Ferrites/Materials/PDF/PDF__T38,property=Data__en.pdf;/PDF_T38.pdf)
---
The saturation inductance between the cold-rolled steel and the NanoPerm core seem similar (around 2 Tesla).
If this is real and you decide to instrument correctly then it is important.
If you don’t instrument it correctly then it's no good and most likely
you guys are just fooling yourselves by relying on readings caused by
instrumentation that can't handle the signals. Don't forget that according
the EU licensing authority, a high power electronic device
can't have
a PF power factor that differs from 1.0. due to the availability of power
factor correction circuits.
A raw transformer and Schottky diode 110volt to 12Volt dc power supply
makes it easy to measure filtered power with two DVM’s simultaneously
and the 12volt to 110volt inverter will put any PF power factor and signal
anomalies into the loss column so you can show that you still have energy
gain.
(Also moving clip leads is all that it takes to loop the device).
Using the time delay derived from the DC filter capacitor and two 110
variacs variable autotransformers you can efficiently split the power out
of the inverter up between power going to a dummy load and the power
going to the input of your circuit. This stops any voltage overloading.
Instead of variacs you can also use incandescent light dimmers except
that these add there own harmonic signal hash anomalies to the situation
but they will still factor the average power. The toaster would make an
excellent dummy load since it is purely resistive.
Light dimmers need a transformer that has a load, because pure
inductance doesn't work. And a 1:1 110V transformer can filter the
pulse power draw from your circuit.
Look I have criticized your instrumentation and methods â€" why can’t
you either do it this way or criticize what I am describing. I mean I can
understand…As soon as you do it correctly your instrumentation errors
are going to disappear.
Quote from: Feynman on March 22, 2011, 04:07:09 PM
The Gabriel Device, possible COP=8
...
Closed-loop: Not attempted, can fry the windings without input current control circuitry. (i.e. inverter, battery charger , and battery)
...
Feynman
The output power splitting is a manual setting of the
two variacs or two lamp dimmers which assume that
the gain of the device remains relatively constant.
This is how the input current control circuitry would actually
work except in automatic mode rather than manual mode.
See, what we do at each stage is we move in the direction
that we are going and want to go to build a product. Just wait
to design the regulating circuitry for a demand (user variable)
load.
:S:MarkSCoffman
Sorry I did not test the resistivity of the nanoperm material only the wire I wrapped around it, I have a fluke clamp meter/voltage meter no real fancy equipment how would one go about testing that mine is currently wrapped up awaiting the shell if you want me to test something I surely can.
Honestly Im half tempted to wrap the old shell around this rewired secondary it won't be form fitting but we can at least test somethings out.
Although I did cut a huge chunk out of the center to fit more wire thru so the results may not be the same as last time and its not form fitting.
My only problem with doing that is getting it back out again...
I like the dimmer switch Idea how many amps will go thru it? Its a great way to measure amps but still returning power to the source without consuming it in the toaster.
Quote from: Feynman on March 23, 2011, 02:12:43 PM
Shouldn't that decimal be a comma?!
...
Germany is one of those countries that reverses the period and decimal.
Is the impact of the resistivity limited to only eddy currents and heating? I was thinking about the outer shell, which acts as one shorted continuous conductor.
Quote from: mscoffman on March 23, 2011, 02:31:13 PM
If this is real and you decide to instrument correctly then it is important.
If you don’t instrument it correctly then it's no good and most likely
you guys are just fooling yourselves by relying on readings caused by
instrumentation that can't handle the signals.
Absolutely. How do you think that David's instrumentation introduced error? I mean , this is pretty straightforward. 120VAC at 60hz, no? He's using Kill-A-Watt meters. He either (A) telling the truth,( B) made a measurement error or C) is being dishonest. There are only 3 possibilities. I think it's (A) or (B).
I mean the holy grail is closed loop, but you have to start somewhere and follow up on promising leads.
Quote
A raw transformer and Schottky diode 110volt to 12Volt dc power supply
makes it easy to measure filtered power with two DVM’s simultaneously
and the 12volt to 110volt inverter will put any PF power factor and signal
anomalies into the loss column so you can show that you still have energy
gain.
(Also moving clip leads is all that it takes to loop the device).
Thanks, I like this idea.
QuoteUsing the time delay derived from the DC filter capacitor and two 110
variacs variable autotransformers you can efficiently split the power out
of the inverter up between power going to a dummy load and the power
going to the input of your circuit. This stops any voltage overloading.
Instead of variacs you can also use incandescent light dimmers except
that these add there own harmonic signal hash anomalies to the situation
but they will still factor the average power. The toaster would make an
excellent dummy load since it is purely resistive.
Also great info, thanks. Yeah I thought the same thing, since toaster is essentially just a giant resistor.
QuoteLight dimmers need a transformer that has a load, because pure
inductance doesn't work.
Okay.
QuoteAnd a 1:1 110V transformer can filter the pulse power draw from your circuit.
Can you explain what you mean here a different way? I don't understand.
QuoteLook I have criticized your instrumentation and methods â€" why can’t
you either do it this way or criticize what I am describing. I mean I can
understand…As soon as you do it correctly your instrumentation errors
are going to disappear.
Hmm... not sure I understand...Mark , have you been talking to David on this device prior to today? The first I heard about this was yesterday, and I've decided to take the plunge since I need these materials (toroids of varying permeability/resistivity) anyway. Not sure who you are referring to here.
I haven't done any experiment on this at all; I've ordered materials. One thing to keep in mind is that often people are limited by their knowledge and experience, as well as material and financial resources...
QuoteIf you don’t instrument it correctly then it's no good and most likely
you guys are just fooling yourselves by relying on readings caused by
instrumentation that can't handle the signals
Can you elaborate on this thought?
QuoteThe output power splitting is a manual setting of the
two variacs or two lamp dimmers which assume that
the gain of the device remains relatively constant.
This is how the input current control circuitry would actually
work except in automatic mode rather than manual mode.
I'll have to study what you've posted more, as it's beyond my experience, but I think you have great ideas for controlling a device that runs with gain.
Quote
See, what we do at each stage is we move in the direction
that we are going and want to go to build a product. Just wait
to design the regulating circuitry for a demand (user variable)
load.
Agreed. Hopefully we'll be able to apply your ideas to a solid-state power device running with gain by the end of 2011, whether it's this device or another one! Open-source...
Cheers,
Feynman
Quote from: wayne49s on March 23, 2011, 02:52:02 PM
Germany is one of those countries that reverses the period and decimal.
Is the impact of the resistivity limited to only eddy currents and heating? I was thinking about the outer shell, which acts as one shorted continuous conductor.
If heat due to eddy currents is an issue in this device, in might be overcome with a material that does not conduct electricity, and hence can have no eddy currents, like magnetite;)
Quote from: wayne49s on March 23, 2011, 02:52:02 PM
Germany is one of those countries that reverses the period and decimal.
That explains it, thanks. So that means Nanoperm is one of highest magnetically permeable materials in existence.
QuoteIs the impact of the resistivity limited to only eddy currents and heating? I was thinking about the outer shell, which acts as one shorted continuous conductor.
Well I'm just sort of thinking out loud on here, I have no idea as for the impact of resistivity on the operation of this device. The resistivity of the outer vs inner core might be critical, or it might be irrelevant. Normally , yeah, I think it's major impact is on eddy currents.
Eddy Current LossThe induction of eddy currents within the core causes a resistive loss. The higher the resistance of the core material the lower the loss. Lamination of the core material can reduce eddy current loss, and also making the core of a nonconductive magnetic material like ferrite.
...
Unfortunately , due to the electrical conductivity of [soft iron], at AC frequencies a bulk block or rod of soft iron can often suffer from large eddy currents circulating within it that waste energy and cause undesirable heating of the iron.
Because iron is a relatively good conductor, it cannot be used in bulk form with a rapidly changing field, such as in a transformer, as intense eddy currents would appear due to the magnetic field, resulting in huge losses (this is used in induction heating).
source:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_core (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_core)
QuoteIts cold rolled steel, I'm trying to get L&S to find CRGO steel to increase the tesla rating in the primary, I wish we could make it out of that graphene stuff but thats a long long way off..
Mav, sorry for asking again,
if it's rolled steel it most likely is not magnetic, for instance stainless steel is absolutely NON magnetic, so my question is does a magnet stick to the steel donut? (easiest way to find out)
If it actually is not magnetic than even a wood donut would do. Anything that keeps the primary winding at a certain distance from the secondary.
Mario
ya my 2" inch N50 magnet gloms right to it and takes quite a bit of doing to get it off,
Its magnetic, electrical steel that they use in distribution transformers Is CRGO which stands for Cold Rolled Grain Oriented steel.
Ok Mav, thanks for clarifying!
Mario
@ All,
MAGNETEC Sales in USA
MH&W International Corp.
14 Leighton Place
Mahwah, NJ 07430 USA
Fon: +1(201) 891 8800
Fax: +1(201) 891 0625
magnetec@mhw-intl.com
http://www.mhw-intl.com
for ordering the NANOPERM M-416 Toroid.
Quote from: Feynman on March 23, 2011, 12:25:40 PM
I just called Magnetec, yeah, they say use the web store. Talking on the phone with them was hillarious! The answered the phone in German but they spoke English. I had to slow down my rapid-talking American East Coast accent so they could understand me. They were really friendly btw.
Use the Vebb Store for ordering! ;) They said that's the easiest way. They also take International money wire and Paypal, so you can also do email orders that way.
Anyway, I ordered an M-416 (150 Euro) and an M-412 (50 Euro). After ordering and selecting Paypal, the total was 240 Euro, so the total for the two cores was $348 with shipping.
The M-412 is just a smaller version of the M-416, but has similar specs (permeability, saturation, etc). I'm going to use the M-416 as a production unit , and the M-412 for general experiments. If this whole thing turns out to be a bust (measurement error or something), I can re-use these cores for other toroidal power experiments like the Boyce TPU replication.
But I honestly think we've got something here, or else I wouldn't be so eager to drop $350 on Nanoperm cores. Worst case , the cores can be reused for HV pulsed DC experiments.
Oh also, the woman I spoke to on the phone at Magnetec, Diana, said you can probably substitute the M-116 if they run out of stock of the M-416 (it's the same size, just of slightly differing permeability (M-116 is approx. double the permeability, half the saturation level)
Here's the specs of their "Universal" cores:
http://www.magnetec.de/eng/universal-kerne1.htm (http://www.magnetec.de/eng/universal-kerne1.htm)
@wayne, @e2matrix
Can you link me to the Metglas toroidal material / core that you think most closely matches David's Nanoperm core? You guys probably know more about these specs than I do, I'm learning as I go here...
The way I was reading the German site I thought it would be 100 Euro's for shipping alone (to U.S.). Glad it wasn't that bad. I'm not that up to speed on Metglas specs but I'm sure if you gave them a call or shot them an email with the model M-416 and maybe specs on it they could tell you if they have something that would work. I did see wayne (forget the exact screen name) here say he asked them and they did not have an exact match. In my experience you'd probably want to ask for an engineer at Metglas as a phone order person might find it easiest to just say 'no' we don't have an M-416 if you know what I mean. Not to say wayne didn't try that but it might be worth a try as I think it might save some $$ and time over getting it from European countries (where prices tend to be higher - gas being about double there).
And yeah just like they drive on the wrong side of the road in Europe they also got their period and comma's backwards too .... LOL No offense to our European friends - just teasing a bit.
Good find kampen. Looks like they carry Magnetec as well as other brands.
The Gabriel Device wiring diagram:
Quote from: popolibero on March 23, 2011, 03:36:55 PM
Mav, sorry for asking again,
if it's rolled steel it most likely is not magnetic, for instance stainless steel is absolutely NON magnetic, so my question is does a magnet stick to the steel donut? (easiest way to find out)
If it actually is not magnetic than even a wood donut would do. Anything that keeps the primary winding at a certain distance from the secondary.
Mario
Steel's magnetic properties depend very much on how it was made, etc. But steel is almost always somewhat magnetic.
What depends is the relative permeability , u, (technically u/u0). Steel can vary significantly in magnetic permeability from u=50 to u=4000.
See the permeability chart I posted earlier...
And See here:
Quote
Generally speaking, yes, steel is magnetic. But it should be noted that there are a number of steels that are not magnetic. It is necessary to identify a type of steel before inquiring about its magnetic characteristics.
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Is_steel_magnetic (http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Is_steel_magnetic)
and
Quote
Generally the higher the nickel content the less magnetic.
All stainless steels will effect a compass but austenitic (300 series) won't stick to a magnet
...
The 400 series stainless steel (martinsetic, e.g., 440C stainless) is generally magnetic, while the 300 series (austinetic, e.g., 304 and 316) is not.
http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=305611 (http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=305611)
Incidentally, Electrical steel and Cold-rolled steel have higher magnetic permeability than regular steel.
Now , if the device does not require magnet permeability on the outer primary shell, but requires low-to-moderate resistivity (decent conductivity), then copper would be a good choice for the outer primary since it's non-magnetic (low magnetic permeability).
I wondered myself if wood would work, but I think we are dealing with some sort of relative flux / Faraday-type phenomenon. I think it's something to do with the ratios of magnetic permeability / electrical resistivity on the concentric toroids. The only way to know for sure is to test .
@kampen
Thanks for doing that schematic; I believe yours is more accurate than the one I drew up. I think my schematic had an error because the toaster was not in series. Your schematic should be used as a reference instead.
Hello all
I may have an explanation for the observed effects. Watt meters and amp meters use effective resistance of a circuit to come up with a value. In this circuit that includes the inductive reactance from the coil and resistance from the toaster in series. If you change the inductive reactance of the coil then you change the effective resistance seen by the watt meter. So for a given input voltage when you increase the resistance the current decreases.
So when a load is plugged in on the second "Kill-O-Wat" you are changing the inductive reactance of the coil. Most likely the resistance of the load is being reflected back through the coil. So in effect this circuit is playing with the power triangle between apparent power, reactive power and active power.
:)
Quote from: Montec on March 23, 2011, 11:50:53 PM
Hello all
I may have an explanation for the observed effects. Watt meters and amp meters use effective resistance of a circuit to come up with a value. In this circuit that includes the inductive reactance from the coil and resistance from the toaster in series. If you change the inductive reactance of the coil then you change the effective resistance seen by the watt meter. So for a given input voltage when you increase the resistance the current decreases.
So when a load is plugged in on the second "Kill-O-Wat" you are changing the inductive reactance of the coil. Most likely the resistance of the load is being reflected back through the coil. So in effect this circuit is playing with the power triangle between apparent power, reactive power and active power.
:)
@ Feynman/Montec & All
I've been watching this thread since the start and my original observation was that it looked promising but there's always that nagging measurement question, and this is where Montec might be right.
The only way to end the dispute about measurement errors in my mind (2 cents worth) would be to run the Gabriel Device using a battery and 12V DC/120 AC inverter and measure the C20 drain on the input battery while also charging a battery (or set of batteries) at the output and then switch batteries from the output to the input. Eventually all batteries would either charge or fall flat while running the toaster at the input.
This method although not perfect because of all the losses between the AC inverter at the input and a battery charging transformer at the output would create a drain on the system but if it really is a COP=8 unit it should be able to demonstrate OU off the grid and prove itself capable of running itself while producing extra energy.
Regards,
Paul
Quote from: Montec on March 23, 2011, 11:50:53 PM
Hello all
I may have an explanation for the observed effects. Watt meters and amp meters use effective resistance of a circuit to come up with a value. In this circuit that includes the inductive reactance from the coil and resistance from the toaster in series. If you change the inductive reactance of the coil then you change the effective resistance seen by the watt meter. So for a given input voltage when you increase the resistance the current decreases.
So when a load is plugged in on the second "Kill-O-Wat" you are changing the inductive reactance of the coil. Most likely the resistance of the load is being reflected back through the coil. So in effect this circuit is playing with the power triangle between apparent power, reactive power and active power.
:)
Interesting. This is a good theory , one which may put the device into the 'measurement error' category.
Would a current clamp-on meter on one of the input wires exclude this possibility? This will directly measure induced flux, and give a secondary measure of power consumption by non-invasively measuring the current.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Current_clamp (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Current_clamp)
ATD Tools ATD 5592 60 Amp AC/DC Current Clamp$103 online
Compatible with many lab scopes and graphing multimeters. Use to generate current waveforms for diagnostic analysis. Also works great with digital multimeters. Small jaw opening of 3/8 or 9mm works in tight spaces. Low battery indication. Measure range: 0-60 Amps AC/DC with resolution of .01a.
http://www.amazon.com/Advanced-Tool-Design-ATD-5592-Current/dp/B000OV31J2 (http://www.amazon.com/Advanced-Tool-Design-ATD-5592-Current/dp/B000OV31J2)
P.S. Some good data would be to measure the inductance and resistance of the unloaded primary, the toaster dummy load, the toaster dummy load plus primary, the unloaded secondary, and the loaded secondary.
@Mavendex,
Did you ever measure the VAR values consumed by your prototype?
Looking to the theoretical model, it consumes a lot of VAR.
Your KillaWatt meter should have an option to measure VAR, I guess?
The 'Kill-O-Watt' Meter for measuring active power works fine for measuring the input power. (and nothing else is recommended here)
For measuring output power one should use a bridge rectifier , through a large cap, for measuring dc values at the output by simply multiplying.
These 'Kill-O-Watt' Meter alike devices measure true rms of any kind of waveform . There are a lot of different devices in a household resulting in different kind of waveforms for the current.
1) A inductance results in a sinewave for I , which lack after the voltage.
2) Switched power supplies : the form of the current depends on the load , is never a sinewave
3) Power consumed by a load regulated through a dimmer...
(There is surely no constant value describing the ratio of Umax an Urms there)
If this meters where not that versatile a electronic troll like a normal consumer would not get any correct watts consuming value.
For measuring the output power, I am not sure, if the meter needs to be plugged into a wall socket for the measurement electronic must be supplied with the right input voltage to measure correctly.
http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a57/Mavendex/2011-03-23_18-22-32_480_Kearney.jpg
http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a57/Mavendex/2011-03-23_18-22-04_636_Kearney.jpg
http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a57/Mavendex/2011-03-23_18-21-49_526_Kearney.jpg
http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a57/Mavendex/2011-03-23_18-12-50_299_Kearney.jpg
Since I can't answer a bunch of these questions while I wait for my part to show up Im going ahead with the rebuild with more wire and the modified shell I started with. The Shell had another inch taken out of the center to allow for more room of the wire, you can see that there is a huge gap in the center and I probably have a fingers width (skinny finger) of space from the top of the wrapped nanoperm and where the top of the shell is on the inside.
epoxy has been drying all night should be ready for some wire this evening.
the links are to the pics on photobucket
Mav
I looked into the "kill-a-watt" meters awhile ago because some posters mentioned they measured true power and found some that could display PF and some did not show that possibility. So I believe the ones that can do that would measure true power. Here's a link to one model (not expensive) that did that: http://www.weemscreeksolutions.com/Resources/KillAWatt-P440_Instructions.pdf
Mav: Do you know if your meter has that capability? Otherwise it may not measure true power.
/Wayne
Ya it measures true power.
Quote from: Mavendex on March 24, 2011, 09:47:27 AM
Ya it measures true power.
That's good to know! I also further thought that if the meter did not consider inductance and just used a resistor to extract the current to calculate the power, that the error would be such that it would indicate more power used than actual (ie. PF is less than the assume 1). This means that the primary would show more power used than actual. The secondary is all resistive in your setup, so no need to question this reading. Therefore if there was any error in the primary measurement, it would mean actual power gain is more than indicated! If there is anything wrong with this conclusion, please comment.
Mav: I noticed the last schematic indicated turns for the coil, but in other place, it was mentioned in ft. Which is right?.. and there is a big difference from a 1:1 turn ratio which would mean a lot of flux leakage. Can you clarify?
hi Feynman
thanks for the kind words posted on my thread recently!
it's a breath of fresh air to see your 'no-nonsense/'can-do' approach returning to the forum - we need more of this!
...just a few thoughts & suggestions relating to this project:-
1) as the toaster heats up, what effect does its
resistance/current characteristics have on the system?
(with & without an o/p load on system)?
2) the K-o-W meter measuring the sytsem o/p is designed to accept power at 120V AC from wall socket;
so how does it respond to 120V from the toaster/transformer combo?
(which is presumably not at all similar to the impedance of the utility supply)
here is a simple test to confirm meter & system characteristics:
A) plug K-o-W meter #2 into wall socket;
plug 100W lamp into K-o-W #2
- what is K-o-W #2 RMS power reading?
B) plug K-o-W meter #1 into wall socket;
plug same 100W lamp into K-o-W #1
- what is K-o-W #1 RMS power reading?
C) switch off K-o-W #1 at wall socket;
plug 100W lamp back into K-o-W #2;
connect K-o-W meter #2 up to toroid o/p;
plug toaster/toroid into into K-o-W #1;
plug K-o-W meter #1 into wall socket;
switch on K-o-W #1 at wall socket
- what is K-o-W #1 RMS power reading?
- what is K-o-W #2 RMS power reading?
how soon could Mav tell us these 4 readings?
Thane heins is obviously aware of this system (he offered to write Mav's patent) - it would be good to contact Thane & ask him for his comments on the system
looking forward to seeing how this develops
all the best
np
http://docsfreelunch.blogspot.com/ (http://docsfreelunch.blogspot.com/)
Hey Wayne,
I use feet of wire, then measure my ohms on the wire, as it stands now what I have on the secondary is 4.2 ohms of resistance and then I try and match that on the primary so I can get 120 volts or more hopefully more it doesn't always work out that way but its a good guesstimate. Like I said before Im no engineer just a tinker ling who is fascinated with how things work and trys to find good simple ways to make things work better.
So in your replication with the part you will be receiving from L&S 1000 feet of 16awg wire will fit perfectly in shell, if you want to use less wire you can always move to useing more insulation on your wire too fill the space.
As far as how the device works I think that Thanes Ideas are sound on this although we don't use 2 secondaries its just simplified down to 1 in Thanes model he uses 1 of the secondaries to transfer power to the second core and then extracts the energy here its pretty much the same its just layered so the primary is transferring power to the second core and then the bef is trapped in the secondary then all we do is extract the energy. Honestly I don't think it works any differently than Thanes model the biggest difference is that the secondary is getting the Full on flux of the primary vs. thanes model where its more spread out.
I should have this guy put back together by the weekend I was told that I should get a new killowatts out of the box incase mine have been damaged due to my experimentation. So I'll order those as well we can do some tests hopefully have a video up for you guys by the end of next week, depends on how much actual work I have to do at my job it ebbs and flows.
Mav
Okay, this is promising. I think the objections on the Kill-O-watt meter are not to the level that it would prevent me, personally, from attempting replication, especially if it is the higher-end Kill-O-Watt model which measures actual power.
The output power capacitor measurement thing is a good idea... but so are 60W light bulbs. I mean , if you can light 8 60W light bulbs at full brightness (480W) on the secondary, with 60W (120VAC at 0.5A) of input power consumption on the primary, that's an indication something interesting is happening.
I agree there need to be more 'scientific' measurements, but we've basically got to do the best we can with limited budgets and time etc. Hopefully if we can get at least one working replication going of whatever we are observing here, then this will become easier -- to either confirm or disconfirm anomalous energetic phenomenon. I ordered Nanoperm cores yesterday -- they'll probably ship next week.
@mavendex
Thanks for posting these pictures. Your craftsmanship is impressive. It's going to be interesting when I post my replication because it's going to be 90% duct tape and superglue!
Anyway, I noticed that the outer steel core in these pictures has a large amount (2"-3" aka 4.4cm -6.6cm) of steel cut out of the center. Why is this? Do you think this will effect the back-EMF canceling effect of the outer shell? Would it be better to have the shell completely contain the primary?
Did your original device that you made before (with COP=8) have this break in the center of the outer steel toroidal primary?
Thanks,
Feynman
Quote from: nul-points on March 24, 2011, 10:37:08 AM
hi Feynman
thanks for the kind words posted on my thread recently!
No problem, I'm just trying to get open-source OU!
Quote
it's a breath of fresh air to see your 'no-nonsense/'can-do' approach returning to the forum - we need more of this!
Thanks. I want someone to make something like Linux for overunity. Like a base 'kernel' on which people can build tons of variations on devices, with full open source documentation in PDF. So I'm just trying to propagate that idea, and it was encouraging to see you were thinking the same way by making a PDF.
Quote
1) as the toaster heats up, what effect does its
resistance/current characteristics have on the system?
(with & without an o/p load on system)?
I don't know about a toaster... but I know this:
When a light bulb starts from cold, it has very low resistance. It can be as low as 16 Ohms!! So when it starts up the 'kick' (ala Steven Mark) shoots across the tungsten carrying alot of 'impulse' (voltage, current, and whatever else EMF is -really- comprised of). Then, as the light bulb starts to heat up , the resistance increases (and thus the current consumption decreases). I think a 60W light bulb will climb up to the vicinity of 500 Ohms to 2K Ohms after it heats up.
It's possible a toaster has a similar temperature dependent effect, so we'll need to consider this during any sort of modeling or calculations unless the toaster resistance is experimentally derived. I doubt it's fixed, (I think toaster has temp-dependent resistance), but I don't know for sure. I'm just basing this on the behavior of light bulbs.
Quote2) the K-o-W meter measuring the sytsem o/p is designed to accept power at 120V AC from wall socket;
so how does it respond to 120V from the toaster/transformer combo?
(which is presumably not at all similar to the impedance of the utility supply)
This is a good question. My theoretical knowledge here is too shallow to answer . I'll leave that to someone else. My solution to everything is to experimentally test it, so to answer that question I'd probably scope the waveform loaded and unloaded and post the pictures -- lol.
Quote from: Feynman on March 24, 2011, 12:06:22 PM
@mavendex
Thanks for posting these pictures. Your craftsmanship is impressive. It's going to be interesting when I post my replication because it's going to be 90% duct tape and superglue!
Anyway, I noticed that the outer steel core in these pictures has a large amount (2"-3" aka 4.4cm -6.6cm) of steel cut out of the center. Why is this? Do you think this will effect the back-EMF canceling effect of the outer shell? Would it be better to have the shell completely contain the primary?
Did your original device that you made before (with COP=8) have this break in the center of the outer steel toroidal primary?
Thanks,
Feynman
@ Feynman
yes I cut it out before by 1 inch, only this time I took a plasma cutter to it and took out a extra inch. This is why I had L&S retool the tool to make the shell form fitting all the way around, My theory is that if we contain it 100% that we can get a better outcome and less power being used possibly just feeding it from the wall with that Dimmer switch instead of having a resistive load, which will make things even more simple.
I also have a theory that the secondary is just transferring amps from the primary while voltage doesn't drop until you try and take a large amount of amps from the primary if that is the case increasing the flow with the dimmer switch would allow us to keep our OU properties and allow us to recapture even more energy, up to the ampicity of the wire. All the while the energy is being returned to the source with little or no loss.
I do have a question tho if 16 awg wire is rated for 600volts then can I still draw up to its 22 amp capacity without it blowing, IF yes then 1 unit should be able to power a home at peak performance, although the device wouldn't be powering the house directly only taking from the grid and pumping it back with excess while your home would still be running on the grid.
Thus stopping your meter from turning or just turning it backwards and then if you live in a public power state like Nebraska its is Law that they have to pay you the adjusted cost.
Just some ideas
Mav
I hope that makes sense.
Ebay.Com sells Kill-A-Watt Meters for $22 with FREE SHIPPING.
HarborFreight.Com sells Clamp On Ammeters for $20.
.
Quote from: Mavendex on March 24, 2011, 12:37:01 PM
@ Feynman
yes I cut it out before by 1 inch, only this time I took a plasma cutter to it and took out a extra inch.
Okay, thanks. But why did you cut it out in the first place? Sorry I don't understand, maybe try explaining it a different way... Did you cut the primary steel shell with the plasma cutter , so the secondary with wiring would fit inside the primary? Did you cut it so you'd have wiring access to the inside of the secondary? I'm don't understand why you cut the primary part out , basically.
QuoteThis is why I had L&S retool the tool to make the shell form fitting all the way around,
Okay. Let us know what part we should order from L&S... have you talked to them lately? I called them about 3 days ago and they didn't seem to remember the part number . I emailed them pictures but haven't gotten a response yet.
If I call them today or tomorrow, will they sell me the new part? Or is it better to wait until next week...
QuoteMy theory is that if we contain it 100% that we can get a better outcome and less power being used possibly just feeding it from the wall with that Dimmer switch instead of having a resistive load, which will make things even more simple.
I like the idea of the dimmer switch too, it gives more control. Hopefully that works and an inductive heating element is not a requirement for the effect.
QuoteI also have a theory that the secondary is just transferring amps from the primary while voltage doesn't drop until you try and take a large amount of amps from the primary if that is the case increasing the flow with the dimmer switch would allow us to keep our OU properties and allow us to recapture even more energy, up to the ampicity of the wire. All the while the energy is being returned to the source with little or no loss.
This is a good idea. Another to consider is that you might not be able to take out more power than is circulating in the primary or secondary toroid in magnetic flux. There might be some sort of flux equilibrium that gets disturbed. Also maybe it has something to do with inductive coupling.
QuoteI do have a question tho if 16 awg wire is rated for 600volts then can I still draw up to its 22 amp capacity without it blowing, IF yes then 1 unit should be able to power a home at peak performance, although the device wouldn't be powering the house directly only taking from the grid and pumping it back with excess while your home would still be running on the grid.
No idea, though I know from previous experiments with high voltage you need lots of insulation because it arcs really easily. This was at 6kV with laser power supply.... Maybe someone else can answer this question.
QuoteThus stopping your meter from turning or just turning it backwards and then if you live in a public power state like Nebraska its is Law that they have to pay you the adjusted cost.
I'm sure the power companies will be delighted, haha. Hey it's only fair with all this contrived concern over 'energy' (oil supplies, nuclear power, etc) that somehow it get solved open-source sometime soon.
Quote from: Feynman on March 24, 2011, 12:54:34 PM
Okay, thanks. But why did you cut it out in the first place? Sorry I don't understand, maybe try explaining it a different way... Did you cut the primary steel shell with the plasma cutter , so the secondary with wiring would fit inside the primary? Did you cut it so you'd have wiring access to the inside of the secondary? I'm don't understand why you cut the primary part out , basically.
The original Toroid I had made was for rodin coil experiments, thats why it looks like it does, but for this experiment I needed more room to feed wire on to the primary, the last variation when I cut out 1 inch allowed me to put on extra wire but I still ran out of room, so I took out another inch so we can get the necessary wire placed on to the primary.
As far as L&S I called them and told them to source out the part you will be getting the new piece I had retooled, because this shell isn't optimal. the only nice thing about having such a large gap in the center is it allows the inside parts to breath a bit. but we can do the same with the new part if need be.
Hello Mavendex
As a test you can calculate the value of a capacitor and put it in parallel with the coil. The reactance of the capacitor should remove the reactive power drain portion of the total power measured by the "Kill-O-Watt" meter.
Calculating the value of the capacitor:
Measure the voltage drop across the toaster. Measure the current in the circuit. Calculate power used by toaster P=IV. Subtract the toaster power (P) from the power (S) measured by the "Kill-O-Watt" meter. Whats left is the reactive power (Q) drawn by the coil from the power supply. BTW cosÓ¨ = P/S (Power factor of the circuit )
The reactance (Xc) of the required capacitor is
Xc = V2/Q V = mains power voltage
C = 1/(ωXc) where ω = 2πf (f = frequency of mains) This should give you an approximate value for a capacitor to try.
Now when you draw power from the second "Kill-O-Watt" meter, the first meter should indicate an increase in power consumption. If it does not then you have a possibility of an over unity device.
:)
For those that don't know, Kill-A-Watt meters measure
Volts, Amps, Watts, Hertz, Power Factor, & KWH (Killawatt Hours).
.
Quote from: Mavendex on March 24, 2011, 01:09:47 PM
The original Toroid I had made was for rodin coil experiments, thats why it looks like it does, but for this experiment I needed more room to feed wire on to the primary, the last variation when I cut out 1 inch allowed me to put on extra wire but I still ran out of room, so I took out another inch so we can get the necessary wire placed on to the primary.
Okay, thanks, that answers my question.
QuoteAs far as L&S I called them and told them to source out the part you will be getting the new piece I had retooled, because this shell isn't optimal. the only nice thing about having such a large gap in the center is it allows the inside parts to breath a bit. but we can do the same with the new part if need be.
Okay sounds good. I suppose we can always add a CPU fan if there are eddy current losses in the steel and it heats up.
Quote from: Montec on March 24, 2011, 01:10:41 PM
Hello Mavendex
As a test you can calculate the value of a capacitor and put it in parallel with the coil. The reactance of the capacitor should remove the reactive power drain portion of the total power measured by the "Kill-O-Watt" meter.
Allright I'm gonna put my ignorance on full display here.
QuoteCalculating the value of the capacitor:
Measure the voltage drop across the toaster.
How do you suggest one does that? By measuring the impedance of the toaster, and then calculate the voltage drop as E = IZ, where I is toaster current consumption , and Z is toaster impedance? This may suffer from the problem , as the toaster current consumption / resistance is probably temperature dependent if it's anything like a conventional light bulb.
QuoteMeasure the current in the circuit.
With conventional DMM in series with the toaster while powered on? Isn't this prone to the same error that you objected to in the first place (amp meters being 'tricked' by inductive reactance?) The toaster current might be time-variant even without the primary.
QuoteUsing a conventional DMM Calculate power used by toaster P=IV. Subtract the toaster power (P) from the power (S) measured by the "Kill-O-Watt" meter.
So here you would use the E value calculated previously for the voltage drop for V, and you would use the current you measured previously for I just for just the powered-on toaster in isolation?
QuoteWhats left is the reactive power (Q) drawn by the coil from the power supply. BTW cosÓ¨ = P/S (Power factor of the circuit )
Okay.
QuoteThe reactance (Xc) of the required capacitor is
Xc = V2/Q V = mains power voltage
Okay. What material capacitor is preferable?
QuoteC = 1/(ωXc) where ω = 2πf (f = frequency of mains) This should give you an approximate value for a capacitor to try.
Okay that's a PI value not an 'n' just to clarify for the record. :)
QuoteNow when you draw power from the second "Kill-O-Watt" meter, the first meter should indicate an increase in power consumption. If it does not then you have a possibility of an over unity device.
Okay, thanks. This is pretty complicated and is beyond my understanding, but hopefully we still get COP>1 even if we add the capacitor to the coil.
Just a question on the winding ratio.
At the PesWiKi website I noticed that the around 300 feet of wire is used for the secondary (inner) coil and 400 feet for the primary (outer) coil.
It seems that because of the diameter difference between primary and secondary coil, the winding ratio is far from 1:1.
I would estimate it around prim:sec = 1:10.
This means that the voltage at the secondary would be 10 times higher as the input voltage.
So, the diagram of Kampen (reply #65) likely contains some flaws regarding the windings.
Also, mind you, we are probably talking 1kV at the output.
That's probably lethal for those that do not mind.
Is there any measurement data available on the voltages?
Hello
As an addendum to my previous post:
If you know the power factor for an inductive device or circuit then the reactive power (Q) is
Q = S x sin(cos-1(power factor)) where S is the power in VA (volt amps) measured by the watt meter.
Just for information:
S (apparent power) is measured in VA (volt amps)
P (real power) is measured in W (watts) This power is able to do work.
Q (reactive power) is measured in "vars" (quadrature "imaginary" power)
So S2 = P2 + Q2
:)
Quote from: Montec on March 24, 2011, 01:10:41 PM
Hello Mavendex
As a test you can calculate the value of a capacitor and put it in parallel with the coil. The reactance of the capacitor should remove the reactive power drain portion of the total power measured by the "Kill-O-Watt" meter.
Calculating the value of the capacitor:
Measure the voltage drop across the toaster. Measure the current in the circuit. Calculate power used by toaster P=IV. Subtract the toaster power (P) from the power (S) measured by the "Kill-O-Watt" meter. Whats left is the reactive power (Q) drawn by the coil from the power supply. BTW cosÓ¨ = P/S (Power factor of the circuit )
The reactance (Xc) of the required capacitor is
Xc = V2/Q V = mains power voltage
C = 1/(ωXc) where ω = 2πf (f = frequency of mains) This should give you an approximate value for a capacitor to try.
Now when you draw power from the second "Kill-O-Watt" meter, the first meter should indicate an increase in power consumption. If it does not then you have a possibility of an over unity device.
:)
I'm sure this is a great method but unfortunately I don't speak formula very well. When we get this finished this week and Ill run some tests to see if I can replicate it myself then mabeyewe can all get in to skype mode and you can walk me thru it.
Mav
Hello Feynman
After the toaster warms up the current should stabilize. Use a DMM to measure the voltage drop across the toaster. The toaster should be a pure resistive load so the real power it uses is in watts. The same current flows though both the coil and toaster but the phase between current and voltage is not the same when measured across the toaster and across the coil. The coil lags the toaster by 90°. ie The current stays constant in a series circuit but the voltage waveform moves by 90° when the voltage drop across the toaster is compared to the voltage drop across the coil by an oscilloscope.
The current can be calculated by putting in a know value of resistor in the circuit and measuring the voltage drop across it. Or just use a current meter in the "Kill-O-Watt" device. A clamp on current meter would also work.
QuoteSo here you would use the E value calculated previously for the voltage drop for V, and you would use the current you measured previously for I just for just the powered-on toaster in isolation?
No, use the current from an operating toaster and coil circuit.
QuoteOkay. What material capacitor is preferable?
Material does not matter just be sure that the capacitor can handle the voltage.
QuoteOkay that's a PI value not an 'n' just to clarify for the record.
Yes 2"pi"f was the intended meaning.
:)
Mavendex, Regarding the wire guage size question I can tell you what is required by house wiring codes and for safety. That doesn't mean it wouldn't work with less but it is a good guideline when it gets down to powering real loads. For a 20 amp circuit 12 guage wire is required. For 15 amp circuits 14 guage is generally required. Those assume 120 volts. Most houses could actually run if they had a continuous 2400 watt source (20 Amps x 120 volts =2400 watts). That kind of power would if charging a battery bank into a large inverter could cover most usage other than 230 volt devices like stoves and HVAC. If one had several Gabriel devices or one large one it could easily power a home if this all works out. Fingers crossed :)
@ e2matrix,
Can You please calculate (AWG) and show us also for 220/230 VAC/50Hz (European household)
Section fuse is 15 to 20A rated. Main fuse is 35A rated.
Quote from: kampen on March 24, 2011, 03:24:03 PM
@ e2matrix,
Can You please calculate (AWG) and show us also for 220/230 VAC/50Hz (European household)
Section fuse is 15 to 20A rated. Main fuse is 35A rated.
kampen, I knew the values for U.S. houses because I studied the electrical codes when I wired my own house. I would have to Google to see what they would be in Europe. I wouldn't want to tell you something wrong on that so I'd suggest you Google something like 'house wiring guage' +building codes for your particular country. It shouldn't be too hard to find all the commonly used wire guage sizes used in homes. I do know because it is higher voltage that they can get away with smaller wire size than you need for 120 volt.
Mains wiring in USA 120VAC 60Hz:
Most US household circuits are 15 amp (15 amp receptacles, 14 guage wire, 15 amp breaker or fuse).
The wiring in the walls is at least 14 gauge (better yet 12) as that's the minimum allowed by the NEC for 15 Amp breaker circuits.
Today's code requires 20 amp (12 guage wire and 20 amp recepticles) in kitchens and dining rooms. Today'd code needs 12 guage wire to bathroom outlets, although these are usually 15 amp outlets so one should not exceed 15 amps.
Copper wire resistance table for some wires used in main wiring applications:
AWG Feet/Ohm Ohms/100ft Ampacity* mm^2 Meters/Ohm Ohms/100M
10 490.2 .204 30 2.588 149.5 .669
12 308.7 .324 20 2.053 94.1 1.06
14 193.8 .516 15 1.628 59.1 1.69
16 122.3 .818 10 1.291 37.3 2.68
18 76.8 1.30 5 1.024 23.4 4.27
The wire thickness used in USA for mains wiring are specified in unit called AWG.
Here is some data on different
AWG Feet/Ohm Ohms/100ft Ampacity* mm^2 Meters/Ohm Ohms/100M
10 490.2 .204 30 2.588 149.5 .669
12 308.7 .324 20 2.053 94.1 1.06
14 193.8 .516 15 1.628 59.1 1.69
16 122.3 .818 10 1.291 37.3 2.68
18 76.8 1.30 5 1.024 23.4 4.27
20 48.1 2.08 3.3 0.812 14.7 6.82
22 30.3 3.30 2.1 0.644 9.24 10.8
24 19.1 5.24 1.3 0.511 5.82 17.2
26 12.0 8.32 0.8 0.405 3.66 27.3
28 7.55 13.2 0.5 0.321 2.30 43.4
These Ohms / Distance figures are for a round trip circuit.
Specifications are for copper wire at 77 degrees Fahrenheit or 25 degrees Celsius.
The size of wire inside wall:
Gauge Amps
14 15
12 20
10 30
8 40
6 65
Mains wiring in Europe 220/230VAC 50Hz:
Within the European Community the mains voltage is currently 230V +10/-6% (50Hz) between the LIVE and the NEUTRAL terminals, together with a separate protective EARTH terminal. The history for 50 Hz frequency is form Germany. At the beginning of 1900 in Germany, AEG had a virtual monopoly on lectrical power systems. AEG decided to use 50 Hz and this standard spread to the rest of the continent.
The mains connections and wiring practices vary somewhat from country to country. In Europe, two wire (ungrounded) wall outlets supply maximum of 6A (10A in some countries). Three wire (grounded) outlets, maximum of 15A or 16A depending on the country (sometimes fused only with 10A fuse). All mains wall outputs are fused at distribution point in house. In modern installations in Northern Europe the wall outputs are grounded outlets often 16 A per circuit. In most countries system uses a star arrangement in which a cable from the fusebox feeds, for example all of the wall outlets in one room only. The fuses or more commonly, circuit breakers, are designed to protect not just the wiring inside the wall but also the wiring from mains plug to device devices and devices. So, there are no fuses in the plugs. The houses/apartments in Europe can be supplied by single phase power or three phase supply. If three phase supply is used, separate rooms in the same apartment may be on different phase.
In most European countries the electrical mains connectors are not polarized. This means that generally common 2 pin and 3 pin mains connector plugs may be inserted either way to the wall, thus interchanging neural and live wires going to equipment. The design philosophy of e.g. the German system (Schuko) is that a room (or a small number of rooms) has a 10 A or 16A fuse in the consumer unit, and all leads and plugs are designed to withstand any short-circuit current that will not yet blow the fuse (today usually circuit breakers are used, not fuses). If a fault occurs, a circuit breaker is trivial to reset, The fuses are generally in the main distribution panel.
Typical current rating for wires used in mains wiring inside wall in Europe:
Cs.mm 1.5mm=10A Cs.mm 2.5mm 20A (3Phase)
The wires used in extension cords and equipment wires are generally somewhat thinner because they are better cooled than wires inside wall, so can withstand more heating power.
The typical wire sides used in 3 core equipment cables:
Cross- Overload
sectional current
area rating
0.5mm 3A
0.75mm 6A
1.0mm 10A
1.25mm 13A
1.5mm 16A
2.5mm 20A
In European countries power cords all have to be sheathed, which means there are always two layers of insulation around the conductors (or one extra thick layer).
Quote from: Mavendex on March 24, 2011, 10:44:38 AM
As far as how the device works I think that Thanes Ideas are sound on this although we don't use 2 secondaries its just simplified down to 1 in Thanes model he uses 1 of the secondaries to transfer power to the second core and then extracts the energy here its pretty much the same its just layered so the primary is transferring power to the second core and then the bef is trapped in the secondary then all we do is extract the energy. Honestly I don't think it works any differently than Thanes model the biggest difference is that the secondary is getting the Full on flux of the primary vs. thanes model where its more spread out.
@Mav
I see what you are saying about the toroid being better to transfer the flux. My point is that the BEMF (secondary core flux) is seen by the primary according to classic electricity by Faraday's law because the primary coil encompasses the secondary core. But at this point, I'm happy your device works, and we can figure out why later.
Your generosity to open source and full disclosure is much appreciated by everyone here.
Mavendex,
What Wayne says is very true,And no matter what happens ,You bring a very good feeling to this place,
And we are Quite Proud there are men like you in this world!
Gabriel must be someone special,I hope your example helps to carry them through a wonderful life!
From the edge of the seat..............
Chet
http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a57/Mavendex/2011-03-24_19-37-51_338_Kearney.jpg
Here's what we did last night got 1.6 ohms of resistance on the primary at this time. Did some prelim tests just to see if we have continuity and all that fun stuff, a quick power test to see where we where on volts, up to 180 at this time.
with out hooking up everything under the sun its Displaying excellent characteristics to the original model.
Ill do more in depth tests this evening, before I add more wire to it.
I did change from the twisted tinned plated copper to just a twisted pair magnet wire 16 awg, its cheaper than using up my nice wire and it seems to be working the same.
Thanks for all the kind words, there is a couple of reasons that im leary about patenting and more for open sourcing,
1. if the gov doesn't like it then they can place a gag order on it preventing me or anyone else from commercializing it, which would be bad.
2. the world needs this energy like 10 years ago, and there is no way I can source out what the world consumes by myself.
I didn't actually have a name for it, I work at a church as media director there was a picture of Gabriel so hence the name.
Mav
You Picked a very good name!
Quote from: wayne49s on March 25, 2011, 07:56:44 AM
@Mav
I see what you are saying about the toroid being better to transfer the flux. My point is that the BEMF (secondary core flux) is seen by the primary according to classic electricity by Faraday's law because the primary coil encompasses the secondary core. But at this point, I'm happy your device works, and we can figure out why later.
Your generosity to open source and full disclosure is much appreciated by everyone here.
Hmm makes me wonder if the outer shell is just that, and can take the heat. Lets say that the outer primary can influence the secondary through the shell. But as the theory goes, the secondary field never gets to escape from the inner core, maybe if super saturated, and if it cant escape the inner core, then no affect on the primary. Very simple.
There is probably another use here for the shell as a core. Ive just found it hard to find a function while thinking it might shield the secondary from the primary by being in the way, at least in some fashion. That info should be the last stone turned here. ;]
Mags
Mags
Quote from: Feynman on March 22, 2011, 04:07:09 PM
The Gabriel Device, possible COP=8
Rather than start a new thread, I'll just ask the question:
Can one's electric bill be lowereed by back-feeding the output of a Gabriel Fevice to a wall outlet? Either the same plug as the tap-off point, or, another plug on the same electrical circuit?
Thusly:
------------------------------------
| |
\ / /\
Outlet -----> Current Gabriel----
Limiter-----> Device
My thinking:
The sin wave wall current is always in phase,
and, the COP is supposed to be 8 or more.
Ultimate question, which I've never tried:
Can the hot and neutral leads of a wall plug be connected directly together if the whole power system is in phase?
If so, this should theoretically work? I have yet to try with full voltage from the wall, but I do have several transformers to step down voltage.
--Lee
Quote from: twinbeard on March 23, 2011, 02:57:40 PM
If heat due to eddy currents is an issue in this device, in might be overcome with a material that does not conduct electricity, and hence can have no eddy currents, like magnetite;)
Hi twinbeard,
This is something that we can look as part of optimization after the replication/validation is done to give us a baseline reference.
/Wayne
Quote from: Magluvin on March 25, 2011, 12:59:06 PM
Hmm makes me wonder if the outer shell is just that, and can take the heat. Lets say that the outer primary can influence the secondary through the shell. But as the theory goes, the secondary field never gets to escape from the inner core, maybe if super saturated, and if it cant escape the inner core, then no affect on the primary. Very simple.
There is probably another use here for the shell as a core. Ive just found it hard to find a function while thinking it might shield the secondary from the primary by being in the way, at least in some fashion. That info should be the last stone turned here. ;]
Doesn't the fact that the secondary coil gets the induced secondary voltage proof that the shell does not isolate the primary magnetic field to the secondary coil? I know that it sounds intuitive that the secondary flux is contained to the inner core and is isolated from the primary, but the equation related to Faraday's law integrates the magnetic field over the area enclosed by the current loop, and this includes the inner core area.
ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faraday's_law_of_induction
/Wayne
Quote from: the_big_m_in_ok on March 25, 2011, 01:26:33 PM
<snip>
Ultimate question, which I've never tried:
Can the hot and neutral leads of a wall plug be connected directly together if the whole power system is in phase?
If so, this should theoretically work? I have yet to try with full voltage from the wall, but I do have several transformers to step down voltage.
--Lee
I'm not completely sure I understand the question except connecting hot and neutral leads together would in any case I can think of result in a huge spark and hopefully a breaker kicking open before any real damage happens. I'm sure there are safer ways to go about attempting what I believe you are asking. A grid tie inverter may be one. They take a minute to make sure they are completely in sync before sending power back into the grid.
Quote from: wayne49s on March 25, 2011, 01:38:30 PM
Hi twinbeard,
This is something that we can look as part of optimization after the replication/validation is done to give us a baseline reference.
/Wayne
My thought exactly.
Quote from: the_big_m_in_ok on March 25, 2011, 01:26:33 PM
Rather than start a new thread, I'll just ask the question:
Can one's electric bill be lowereed by back-feeding the output of a Gabriel Fevice to a wall outlet? Either the same plug as the tap-off point, or, another plug on the same electrical circuit?
Thusly:
----------------------------------
| |
\ / /\
Outlet -----> Current Gabriel----
Limiter-----> Device
My thinking:
The sin wave wall current is always in phase,
and, the COP is supposed to be 8 or more.
Ultimate question, which I've never tried:
Can the hot and neutral leads of a wall plug be connected directly together if the whole power system is in phase?
If so, this should theoretically work? I have yet to try with full voltage from the wall, but I do have several transformers to step down voltage.
--Lee
Yup just like a induction motor, the transformer is getting its phase from the source so when you send it back in theory it is already phase locked.
the safer way would have a second meter installed and have your output go to that.
Quote from: e2matrix on March 25, 2011, 02:36:15 PM
I'm not completely sure I understand the question except connecting hot and neutral leads together would in any case I can think of result in a huge spark and hopefully a breaker kicking open before any real damage happens.
Yes, I see your point. I may not have been clear enough? What I meant was connect the hot lead from one plug to the hot lead of another plug on the same circuit (ideally) or else the hot lead of another plug on another circuit in the same power mains system. No sparks? Hopefully??
Quote
I'm sure there are safer ways to go about attempting what I believe you are asking. A grid tie inverter may be one. They take a minute to make sure they are completely in sync before sending power back into the grid.
Sure, that would be the answer, but it would be an expensive one. I was thinking of an (potentially? admittedly?) kluge answer that doesn't involve complexity or a lot of money.
--Lee
Quote from: Mavendex on March 25, 2011, 03:43:36 PM
Yup just like a induction motor, the transformer is getting its phase from the source so when you send it back in theory it is already phase locked. ...
Right, I thought as much in a hunch. It should work as I had envisioned.
Quote
...the safer way would have a second meter installed and have your output go to that.
Well, yeah, I know what you're getting at. However, I was taking my impetus from a mail order flyer I had years ago that
suggested, as educational information, that power meters owned by the power provider could be bypassed to reduce the electric bill.
I don't recommend breaking the law. I was just curious, and the Gabriel Device made me even more curious.
--Lee
@all
I talked to Jeff and he recommends anyone interested to send a purchase order. The item is called a magnet housing and is half of the toroid, so you need 2 pieces. There is a setup fee (maybe we can get this cheaper if he sets it up for all interested at the same time) and item cost (price is quantity dependent). They accept cheque or COD. His email is jeff@l-sindustries.com (there is a website).
@Mav: What's the inner and outer diameter of the shell,so I can calculate for wire length needs for the primary.
/Wayne
Quote from: wayne49s on March 25, 2011, 02:01:52 PM
Doesn't the fact that the secondary coil gets the induced secondary voltage proof that the shell does not isolate the primary magnetic field to the secondary coil? I know that it sounds intuitive that the secondary flux is contained to the inner core and is isolated from the primary, but the equation related to Faraday's law integrates the magnetic field over the area enclosed by the current loop, and this includes the inner core area.
ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faraday's_law_of_induction
/Wayne
Well your right. The shell does allow primary to secondary connection. It has to, or no output. What we are looking for is the field lines induced have to cut the sec windings, and the inner core is the destination. But, and I thought about this at work, the secondary field produced when current flows through it, only ever makes it to the shell and not beyond, thus never cutting the conductors from the primary. ;]
Here is a pdf that shows how fields propagate in a transformer. once you get this, my theory works. =]
Mags
edited due to double post.
the site runs really slow for me at times and it seems locked up, so I hit post again, thus 2 posts. I didnt realize it till I just reread.
It seems to be getting slowed down on the chikita info and some google ad stuff. not always. The ads make it nearly impossible to be here on my web phone. All other sites are fine on the phone.
I only load the front page from my phone sometimes at work to see whats up. But i have to set the phone down and come back later to see.
Mags
Tesla patent, magnetic shell between primary and secondary. Better to user soft-iron pieces or wires but it's not easy to assemble.
Hmm,Tesla didn't left much to invent >:( ;D
Hey Forest
Which pat is that. I was going to go look for one, as it seems he has invented everything. ;] I thought that also.
This is big Forest. ;]
Mags
Quote from: the_big_m_in_ok on March 25, 2011, 04:18:32 PM
Yes, I see your point. I may not have been clear enough? What I meant was connect the hot lead from one plug to the hot lead of another plug on the same circuit (ideally) or else the hot lead of another plug on another circuit in the same power mains system. No sparks? Hopefully??Sure, that would be the answer, but it would be an expensive one. I was thinking of an (potentially? admittedly?) kluge answer that doesn't involve complexity or a lot of money.
--Lee
Sounds good and glad that's what you intended. It looks like Mavendex understood you better. I don't know most people's expertise and if I seem something that sounds dangerous I like to make sure none of us makes a bad name for FE research :)
@ All,
anyone interested and located in EUROPE for a purchase order for the 2 pcs. Toroid Magnet Housing (L&S Industries USA) feel free to contact me by PM.
I can collect/handle all European orders and then make one volume purchase order to L&S Industries, so we can get this cheaper if he sets it up for all interested at the same time and item cost (price is quantity dependent).
Upon receipt I will re-mail it within Europe free of shipping charge to You.
Hope this will be any help, let me know.
Quote from: Magluvin on March 25, 2011, 05:45:11 PM
But, and I thought about this at work, the secondary field produced when current flows through it, only ever makes it to the shell and not beyond, thus never cutting the primary conductors ;]
Here is a pdf that shows how fields propagate in a transformer. once you get this, my theory works. =]
Interesting paper and website.. expands the understanding beyond the classic view. I can see that the secondary flux field will be diminished beyond the shell because it has limited permeability; so the reason for the COP=8 and not infinity. Also indicates that a higher permeability gradient between the shell and inner core may have higher COP. Thanks for the insight.
/Wayne
Hey Wayne
Was thinking of if the primary field is able to get through the shell, why cant the secondary. Then I remembered the sec has its own core, of which will attract most if not all of the sec field. Also The primary is right on the surface of the shell, so maybe as fields build around a wire, the first ones to appear expand outward as new ones are created. Either way, maybe the further away, as in the shell from the sec, the sec fields lines, that get to the shell, dont have the pressure to escape beyond the shell to cut the primary windings.
This is just thoughts so far, but i think its the right track. ;]
Mags
Flux will seek the path of least reluctance... :)
Quote from: twinbeard on March 25, 2011, 08:08:55 PM
Flux will seek the path of least reluctance... :)
Yep. They been spanking us around all these years with these regular transformers. Same as piston engines. 30% eff
I have seen transformers that have the core laminates welded in areas around the core. Thats just great. make and insulate the laminates to reduce core losses, then just weld across to connect them again.
Ive also seen where the windings are separated instead of on top of one another, and between the windings, more smaller stack of laminated core material magnetically connecting the outer cores to the inner core, between the windings. More eff losses. Crazy
Mags
Dear OU
Greetings.My device http://www.google.com/patents?id=-ntZAAAAEBAJ&pg=PP1&source=gbs_selected_pages&cad=2#v=onepage&q&f=false
COP related to shield reluctance and input current.
N. Tesla :D
@ All,
UPDATED MESSAGE POOLING ORDER parts for Gabriel Device.
anyone interested and located in EUROPE for a purchase order for the 2 pcs. Toroid Magnet Housing (L&S Industries USA) feel free to contact me by PM.
Ofcourse we can also pool the order for the M-416 (81649) Toroid Core from Magnetec/Germany.
Pooling can save us a lot of money on shipping/handling fees and on taxes.
I can collect/handle all European orders and then make one volume purchase order to L&S Industries, so we can get this cheaper if he sets it up for all interested at the same time and item cost (price is quantity dependent).
Upon receipt I will re-mail it within the European Postal Zone free of shipping charge to You.
Hope this will be any help, let me know.
You can contact me by PM or at: achjansen@yahoo.com
Hi folks, read the whole thread so far, looks promising.
I'm going to build a very small test setup using steel craft wire for the primary shell and ferrite inner toroid, just for fun, we'll see what happens.
Also, I thought about the secondary and its flux field when powering a load.
Since the primary input decreases and the coils are wound the same direction, maybe this is acting like a motor with magnets.
Meaning the secondaries loaded induced flux field is creating a strong enough repulsion zone at the steel primary shell to cause voltage cancellation and reduction in input current, yet at the same time a balance is occurring.
Maybe similar to how two like polarity magnets can attract a piece of iron. Though in the gabriel device, if the primary shell is over saturated by the secondary load flux, then it starts to cause increase of input.
just a few thoughts. Thanks mav, hope this thing pans out.
peace love light
Tyson :)
I am looking for that steel donut here in Germany or UK (because of the tax). any links ?
@all
I spoke to a good friend of mine, and he agrees that there is around 50/50 chance this device works overunity vs a kilo-watt meter measurement error. So we'll have to test more to see.
The measurement error, if it occurs, i likely because the kil-o-watt meter may be tricked by the inductive reactance of the primary. My friend with the suggestions posted here, he agrees that putting the proper value capacitor , in parallel , across the primary coil inputs will solve the problem (bring the voltage / current phase to zero offset in both heating element resistor and the primary). Then the Kill-O-Watt meter will not be tricked no matter what if we do this.
So next step I think is replications and measurements of the voltage drop and the resistance of the 'toaster' (or whatever other current limiting device is used) in series with the primary. This will let us calculate a proper value for the capacitor c, then we can order one from Digikey and put it across the primary to make sure we are not having measurement error.
Another way to test this (exclude measurement error from inductive reactance) is turn off everything in your house except one circuit breaker, and run the device by itself , and run the device powering loads for a period of time (say 60seconds or 120seconds or whatever).. Then measure the energy consuming on the meter to the power company.
This will exclude the possibility of inductive reactance , and if it does , then we likely have true overunity .
I don't get it.Why not use DC-AC inverter ? Start from 12V battery, measure DC amperage going into inverter . 300W inverter would be good,right ?
Quote from: forest on March 26, 2011, 02:47:20 PM
I don't get it.Why not use DC-AC inverter ? Start from 12V battery, measure DC amperage going into inverter . 300W inverter would be good,right ?
@forest
Do you mean instead of using the power co. mains wall socket, use an inverter instead?
If so, I have an automobile powered inverter that takes input from a 12VDC battery (150W). The outlet would be replaced by the inverter, a battery added to the left to power it, and a set of polarity-conscious diodes to the battery terminals from the output of the Gabriel Device.
Was that what you had in mind?
--Lee
I had in my mind the way to get rid of power socket by any good sinewave inverter. ;D Sorry,if that's not possible, I just saw that a natural experiment.
Good inverters have also current limiting breakers.Output should go to transformer and to load. Load and transformer in parallel. then measure output voltage after transformer. It should be 12 V. Transformer rated 80W at least.
If output is fluctuacting above 12V add varistor and a voltage regulator circuit.
When you got steady 12V 80W you know what next...
Yes if this is anywhere close to COP of 8 it should be easy to loop with an inverter and an efficient charger. See Groundloops charger around here. A small inverter can be purchased for under $20. Just having an inverter and a 12 volt battery would even make it easy to verify what power we have with this. And it would eliminate the need for the toaster as a small inverter may only have around 100 watts output. Here's one from Walmart for $17.88 : (handy to have one of these anyway)
140 continuous watts
280 peak watts
USB port
LED lights
120V AC outlet
Built-in safety features
Fused overload protection
Low battery voltage shutdown
High temperature shutdown
Sales pitch over :D
At COP of 8 you might even get away with looping by plugging in a standard trickle charger to the inverter while powering a couple lights.
@ the cell
Is it right that just any steel pipe bend will help? Available even in copper ...
www.huelsmann-gmbh.de/produkte/bogen-halbschalen-galerie/
Quote from: forest on March 26, 2011, 05:06:56 PM
I had in my mind the way to get rid of power socket by any good sinewave inverter. ;D Sorry,if that's not possible, I just saw that a natural experiment.
Good inverters have also current limiting breakers.Output should go to transformer and to load. Load and transformer in parallel. then measure output voltage after transformer. It should be 12 V. Transformer rated 80W at least.
If output is fluctuacting above 12V add varistor and a voltage regulator circuit.
When you got steady 12V 80W you know what next...
This is a good idea as said above also. The inverter output will have to at least be able to handle the primary idle current. Then on the output an eff pulse mode charger to charge a 12v bat or large cap, that can feed the inverter input.
Being if we have a quality charger, the cap should not runaway. ;]
Mags
You probably all know this :P, cheap inverters are modified sine wave, expensive inverters are pure sine wave,
the same type of output as the grid.
I thought it was Paul "Goat" Reply#68 that came up with this idea,
anyway very good to see you back Feynman it's been a long long time, loving this thread.
All the best
well bleh I broke the decoupling too much of the secondary is exposed and its acting like a normal transformer now, good news tho I got the toaster to only use .9 amps ..... I guess that's good news
so when you guys get the shell don't expose the secondary cause it will cause the magnetic flux to go to the wires instead of the nanoperm.
Cut too much out of the center unfortunately.
That faraday cage Idea is spot on correct tho.
Mav
e2Matrix said: Yes if this is anywhere close to COP of 8 it should be easy to loop with an inverter and an efficient charger. See Groundloops charger around here. A small inverter can be purchased for under $20. Just having an inverter and a 12 volt battery would even make it easy to verify what power we have with this. And it would eliminate the need for the toaster as a small inverter may only have around 100 watts output. Here's one from Walmart for $17.88 : (handy to have one of these anyway)
===============================================
I agree with you about using a cheap inverter. Even though a cheap inverter running off a 12V battery doesn't output a pure sinewave, it will still do the job.
1. Measure the power the Inverter takes from the battery to run the Gabriel Device with a Load attached.
2. Measure the power consumed by the load (preferably non-inductive light bulbs).
3. Calculate the Overunity Value.
.
http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a57/Mavendex/lightbulb.jpg
Quote from: Feynman on March 26, 2011, 02:36:48 PM
@all
I spoke to a good friend of mine, and he agrees that there is around 50/50 chance this device works overunity vs a kilo-watt meter measurement error. So we'll have to test more to see.
The measurement error, if it occurs, i likely because the kil-o-watt meter may be tricked by the inductive reactance of the primary. My friend with the suggestions posted here, he agrees that putting the proper value capacitor , in parallel , across the primary coil inputs will solve the problem (bring the voltage / current phase to zero offset in both heating element resistor and the primary). Then the Kill-O-Watt meter will not be tricked no matter what if we do this.
That's why I asked for VAR values earlier in this thread.
I think that there is even a larger chance it's measured incorrectly.
To make sure, you will need current probes and a decent oscilloscope.
You need to take SATURATION in the account... Saturation induce a lot of Harmonics (tipically Harmonic 3), those harmonics current trick hugely killowatt meter... Due to the very low inductance he must limit current with a toaster, wind more turn to increase inductance... So yes like above 50/50 that this device is OU or not... For finish self-looping with a frequency inverter is the best way to see it's OU or not...
Quote from: SchubertReijiMaigo on March 27, 2011, 07:10:23 AM
You need to take SATURATION in the account... Saturation induce a lot of Harmonics (tipically Harmonic 3), those harmonics current trick hugely killowatt meter... Due to the very low inductance he must limit current with a toaster, wind more turn to increase inductance... So yes like above 50/50 that this device is OU or not... For finish self-looping with a frequency inverter is the best way to see it's OU or not...
I second that.
If Tesla's patent nr. 433702 does apply here, here's the text from the patent that hints to this.
In the Figure:
A = iron core
B = secondary winding
C = iron shielding
D = primary winding
Teslaalset,
If the patent that Forest referenced [433702],turns out to be relevant in explaining this device ,or perhaps Thanes device?
How does that effect future Patents founded in this principle??[I know Mev is Open sourcing]
Any Idea?
Thanks
Chet
Quote from: ramset on March 27, 2011, 10:14:37 AM
Teslaalset,
If the patent that Forest referenced [433702],turns out to be relevant in explaining this device ,or perhaps Thanes device?
How does that effect future Patents founded in this principle??[I know Mev is Open sourcing]
Any Idea?
Thanks
Chet
Hey Chet,
This patent is only applicable to this 'shell' transformer.
But in this 'shell' transformer also another 'trick' is used, the difference in core and shell permeability, which make the dimensioning a bit different, but that's a detail.
Thane's BiTT uses only difference in permeability and some other tricks.
I don't know this Tesla patent, Tesla was a great genius after all, I think the most device we try to reproduce or developing was already patented... We rediscover the work of Tesla but invent nothing finally... This guy is not human LOL...
Okay, first , wow@the tesla patent. Did this guy leave anything left to invent? No wonder he got so much accomplished, he didn't have a gf breathing down his neck .
Allright, so I like the idea of running the Gabriel device off a cheap 12V inverter from a battery. This makes it really easy to measure the consumed power (just measure the current draw to the inverter). It's WAY easier to measure power on a straight DC signal from a battery than it is to measure a Wall AC signal through a resistive and inductive load, because of Voltage/Current phase issues. So I like the inverter idea.
Hopefully my Nanoperm parts will ship this week. Whether or not this particular device (Gabriel device) works as it appears (we need more tests), Nanoperm is a really promising material for overunity research. It has much higher magnetic permeability than ferrite.
Regardless of what happens here, I will be using the Nanoperm for Boyce TPU replication and possibly for testing EMDevices' magnetic saturation theory he has posted on overunityresearch.com. And anything else I can think of or that seems promising. The goal is open-source solid-state overunity.
Working on an electromagnet and my blog today, hopefully we can determine with some certainty what is going on with the Gabriel device over the next couple of weeks.
Cheers,
Feynman
The Electrical Engineer, Volume 10. Aug 6th 1890. Page 141: Tesla's Transformer for Motor Work and for Constant Current.
http://books.google.ca/books?id=N-pQAAAAYAAJ&lpg=PA141&ots=uFoZnGIg5Y&dq=tesla%20constant%20current%20at%20all%20loads&pg=PA141#v=onepage&q=tesla%20constant%20current%20at%20all%20loads&f=false (http://books.google.ca/books?id=N-pQAAAAYAAJ&lpg=PA141&ots=uFoZnGIg5Y&dq=tesla%20constant%20current%20at%20all%20loads&pg=PA141#v=onepage&q=tesla%20constant%20current%20at%20all%20loads&f=false)
Hello all
There is a way to measure mutual inductance between two coils if you have access to an induction meter.
First you measure the total inductance of the coils hooked up in series with the winding direction being the same. (L1) Series aiding.
Then you reverse one coil hookup so that you have apposing winding directions in series. (L2) Series apposing.
The mutual inductance between the coils is M = (L1 - L2)/4
Now if there is a difference in M when you change which coil is first in the series, primary or secondary, then you have something of a magnetic diode which will limit back emf.
:)
Quote from: teslaalset on March 27, 2011, 09:03:02 AM
I second that.
If Tesla's patent nr. 433702 does apply here, here's the text from the patent that hints to this.
In the Figure:
A = iron core
B = secondary winding
C = iron shielding
D = primary winding
@all
Because this was a cross section drawing, I'll assume the "iron core" is a toroid? Did Tesla ever use toroids or is it
actually a toroid?
--Lee
Quote from: the_big_m_in_ok on March 28, 2011, 04:00:27 PM
@all
Because this was a cross section drawing, I'll assume the "iron core" is a toroid? Did Tesla ever use toroids or is it actually a toroid?
--Lee
Yup, its a toroid.
Hi folks, well I've been winding my small test setup.
It's a 2" diameter steel toroid.
Using 24 gauge magnet wire for inner secondary, one layer, then electrical tape layer.
Then two layers of 22 gauge steel enameled craft wire for primary ferromagnetic shell, then layer of electrical tape.
Now have to wind primary 24 gauge layer on primary shell.
peace love light
Tyson ;D
Quote from: SkyWatcher123 on March 28, 2011, 06:16:45 PM
Hi folks, well I've been winding my small test setup.
It's a 2" diameter steel toroid.
Using 24 gauge magnet wire for inner secondary, one layer, then electrical tape layer.
Then two layers of 22 gauge steel enameled craft wire for primary ferromagnetic shell, then layer of electrical tape.
Now have to wind primary 24 gauge layer on primary shell.
peace love light
Tyson ;D
Tyson, Where are you getting the steel wire from? I cant find it anywhere.
Quote from: SkyWatcher123 on March 28, 2011, 06:16:45 PM
Hi folks, well I've been winding my small test setup.
It's a 2" diameter steel toroid.
Using 24 gauge magnet wire for inner secondary, one layer, then electrical tape layer.
Then two layers of 22 gauge steel enameled craft wire for primary ferromagnetic shell, then layer of electrical tape.
Now have to wind primary 24 gauge layer on primary shell.
peace love light
Tyson ;D
Hi Skywatcher123
Is that blue wire the going to be acting as your shell?
Correct me if im wrong, but I think the intent is for that "shielding" layer to conduct magnetism around the primary(up until the point of magnetic saturation).
If I were to guess, I would think that using another coil for that purpose will not work very well.
Even in Tesla's patent he is fairly clear about that:
"Upon this core is wound the secondary circuit or coil BB. This latter is then covered with a layer or layers of anealed and insullated iron wires CC,
wound in direction at right angles to the said secondary core."
If all you have available for the shell/shield is that wire, I would think you might be better off winding it as Tesla suggests: around the ring rather then threading it.
Just my 2 cents,
You guys have me at the edge of my seat. Cant wait to see how your experiments progress.
Regards
Very cool Skywatcher. ;]
Just like teslas pat. But , and im not sure it will make a difference, it looks like teslas drawing shows the iron wire for the shield as going around the toroid rather than looping through and around. But if it works, then we have little obstacles in the way of design, which is good. =]
Considering that as we have read here that if the shell were to be open a bit at the seam, we encounter regular transformer issues, well you wont have that horizontal seam , maybe some vertical ones that wont affect things. ;]
Mags
Hi TEKTRON, Don't remember exactly, though it was either hobby lobby or michaels crafts if you have one of those stores by you.
Most craft stores should have the floral steel enameled wire.
Here's a link from hobby lobby
http://shop.hobbylobby.com/search/default.aspx?searchTerm=floral+wire (http://shop.hobbylobby.com/search/default.aspx?searchTerm=floral+wire)
peace love light
Tyson ;)
Hi importfanatik, must have been typing when you guys posted.
It's green enameled steel floral wire and the ends are left open so no current should flow through it, just acting as the primary shell. It shouldn't matter how the ferromagnetic material is placed, as long as it has the right properties i suppose.
Hi magluvin, thanks for comments, only way to know if it will work is give it a go. I'm going to wind one layer for primary and I'm wondering if using a 555 timer to pulse the primary might work.
Otherwise, I will use a transformer output of 12 volts or so AC and see what happens.
Though i do have a 700 watt 12 volt inverter, though that might be too much voltage for this primary. We'll see.
peace love light
Tyson :)
Hey Sky
That was my thoughts exactly on how to approach an input to start with.
First i was thinking just a small 1A 12v wall supply, ac of course. =]
And the 555 will be interesting as we wont be sure of a freq that the transformer will be comfortable with.
And yes, we wont know till you try. =]
Wishing very good luck for you. I applaud the trying something different than the shells, as your way, teslas way, is more viable for builders. ;]
Im taking some different approaches also. As many are going with the shells, we can wait for them to test that way while we take steps forward into the known/unknown. ;]
Either way, it all seems too logical not to work as described.
Mags
Quote from: SkyWatcher123 on March 28, 2011, 11:34:35 PM
must have been typing
It's green enameled steel floral wire and the ends are left open so no current should flow through it, just acting as the primary shell. It shouldn't matter how the ferromagnetic material is placed, as long as it has the right properties i suppose.
Hi magluvin, thanks for comments, only way to know if it will work is give it a go. I'm going to wind one layer for primary and I'm wondering if using a 555 timer to pulse the primary might work.
Otherwise, I will use a transformer output of 12 volts or so AC and see what happens.
Though i do have a 700 watt 12 volt inverter, though that might be too much voltage for this primary. We'll see.
peace love light
Tyson :)
Thanks for the source... I am thinking the ends of the iron wire may need to be shorted together to complete the magnetic circuit?
Hi TEKTRON, connecting the steel wire ends is not needed, think of it like Bedinis welding rod cores, that's its only function.
If you did connect the ends, whatever voltage is induced in the steel wire would create a current, which hinders its function, unless eddy currents are needed for this device to operate, I doubt it. As magluvin pointed out, Tesla used ferromagnetic wire also in his patent.
peace love light
Tyson :)
Hi folks, I read the tesla patent #us433702 that might be similar to the gabriel device. Tesla says in his transformer, the outer primary shell creates a phase lag or time lag between the primary coil and secondary coil.
Kind of reminds of Thanes rotating generators where at certain speed a lag occurs, causing a repulsive kick to his moving magnets instead of a slow down.
This might explain why a load is not reflected back to the primary in gabriels device. Maybe the higher permeability inner toroid only helps to lengthen this phase or time lag between primary and secondary coil.
Also Tesla points out how his primary ferromagnetic shell will only transfer induction to secondary, if primary shell is saturated enough.
I think this sheds more light on what may be happening.
Even in Thanes design, it could very well be that the larger more permeable secondary transformer legs, only help to create a greater phase, time lag so that the loaded secondary coils do not reflect back to primary coil.
Anyway, here is my finished small gabriel device. I placed two layers of the 24 gauge for the primary coil.
peace love light
Tyson :)
Quote from: SkyWatcher123 on March 29, 2011, 08:23:25 PM
Also Tesla points out how his primary ferromagnetic shell will only transfer induction to secondary, if primary shell is saturated enough.
I think this sheds more light on what may be happening.
Tyson :)
Hmm, I wonder if the On and Off action of the primary shield/core, from under saturation, to over saturation shows up on the secondary. A kind of pulsed humps, + and - . I suppose if we were to dose the primary core with a magnet, we might get rectified humps. =]
Mags
Howdy;
Been following this thread since Friday, read through it twice. I'm interested in replicating also, once I have a better understanding of this. I see where the steel rolled toroids can be ordered, and I've found 1000' of 16 gauge wire and speaker wire for around $100, and that's good for about 10 amps. Then there's the nanoperm.
I see there are two suggestions for measuring current by FatBird, would one of each of those be a good choice (I used to have a clamp on ages ago).
Thanks y'all.
Windsor (Mike)
WindsorFarmer, Welcom to OU forum! I think either one may give you some idea of power in and power out but they can be fooled somewhat and as I believe was discussed here the better proof of OU at least IMO would be to run a small inverter from a battery in which case you might even be able to loop the setup with a battery charger. But even if you don't do that you can calculate your DC volts and amps in and get a fairly good idea of what kind of COP you have from what load you are able to run from the output. In other words if you are only using 3 amps at 12 volts (36 watts) and you can light up three 60 watt light bulbs to full brightness (I suggest a light meter to verify) then you've got a winner as that would easily be 5 to 1 COP not even taking into consideration losses in the inverter. But whatever way you choose will be helpful in evaluating this device. The more build the more we can learn about it. Good luck!
Skywatcher - interesting setup and hoping you have success as that would be easier / cheaper :D Do you have everything else needed for a test run? I'm trying to keep my eyes open for some Metglas or similar at a good price.
Quote from: e2matrix on March 29, 2011, 11:50:41 PM
WindsorFarmer, Welcom to OU forum! I think either one may give you some idea of power in and power out but they can be fooled somewhat and as I believe was discussed here the better proof of OU at least IMO would be to run a small inverter from a battery in which case you might even be able to loop the setup with a battery charger. But even if you don't do that you can calculate your DC volts and amps in and get a fairly good idea of what kind of COP you have from what load you are able to run from the output. In other words if you are only using 3 amps at 12 volts (36 watts) and you can light up three 60 watt light bulbs to full brightness (I suggest a light meter to verify) then you've got a winner as that would easily be 5 to 1 COP not even taking into consideration losses in the inverter. But whatever way you choose will be helpful in evaluating this device. The more build the more we can learn about it. Good luck!
One thing with trying an inverter at first is, we need to know the impedance at 60hz of the primary. This will determine the amount of idle power in the primary. Some here like sky will need to experiment first, as his way is not as prescribed from the onset, and probably most are looking to eliminate the toaster. lol =]
So if what you build is different in any way from Gabriels, testing should be done at low power to be sure of what the idle, no load current in the primary will be. Just to be careful and try not to suffer any losses, like a $20 inverter, maybe 2 of them, who knows. This can be discouraging.
And Skys setup may work better at other freq, probably higher. Just a guess.
Mags
Hi folks, hi e2matrix, I have what I think I need.
I have a 750 watt inverter I picked up a few years back at target. The one at this link. http://www.audioallies.com/GetItem.asp?Item=VEC1043 (http://www.audioallies.com/GetItem.asp?Item=VEC1043)
I thought first to use the 110vac output from the inverter and run it through a smaller transformer I have from I think was in a battery charger and use the small transformer in step down for around 12 volts to the gabriel primary coil.
Maybe this smaller transformer will help smooth out the modified sine wave also.
Will use a 1 ohm resistor and/or my dmm to test 12 volt inverter amp draw.
peace love light
Tyson ;)
hi people im new to this thread.
we have to clarify a few things here:
who have done the experiment yet?
sometimes you can not measure true power from the outcoming side for whatever reason.
please make a diode bridge and place a capacitor on the outcoming side, then measure power.
That toaster is an interesting critter, providing impedence. I like the idea of using a dimmer switch, but since it has the possibility of changing the wave form - even if it's just a square wave - that should not be done quite yet.
I have worked with Java, but that was over ten years ago. It would take a little bit to get spun up on making a control circuit for this device, which may provide some really good information about what is happening on the inside as well as some controls.
If you are considering writing a software control for this device, please consider using a portable language as opposed to a proprietary one. The last thing we need is a free energy device with a non-free control app.
Cheers,
Twinberd
Quote from: Potemkyn on March 30, 2011, 10:26:28 AM
That toaster is an interesting critter, providing impedence. I like the idea of using a dimmer switch, but since it has the possibility of changing the wave form - even if it's just a square wave - that should not be done quite yet.
I've worked in electronics, but it's been a few years since I really delved in. I worked on air conditioning systems for three and a half years, then was able to work on Air Traffic Radar systems for almost ten years. High voltage, tube, IC, whatever. If it was or around the radar or the display systems, we worked on it. I was lucky enough to be there when they still worked down tothe component level.
I’m currently an application developer. Most of my code is in ActionScript 2.0 and 3.0, but I also use Visual Basic, C#, SQL, and Javascript. I have worked with Java, but that was over ten years ago.
It would take a little bit to get spun up on making a control circuit for this device, which may provide some really good information about what is happening on the inside as well as some controls.
Quote from: Magluvin on March 30, 2011, 12:24:16 AM
One thing with trying an inverter at first is, we need to know the impedance at 60hz of the primary. This will determine the amount of idle power in the primary. Some here like sky will need to experiment first, as his way is not as prescribed from the onset, and probably most are looking to eliminate the toaster. lol =]
So if what you build is different in any way from Gabriels, testing should be done at low power to be sure of what the idle, no load current in the primary will be. Just to be careful and try not to suffer any losses, like a $20 inverter, maybe 2 of them, who knows. This can be discouraging.
And Skys setup may work better at other freq, probably higher. Just a guess.
Mags
You may have a point although most small inverters I've used will just shut down if you put too much load on them. I think most have some protection circuit. But it's something to be aware of.
Quote from: e2matrix on March 30, 2011, 12:22:07 PM
You may have a point although most small inverters I've used will just shut down if you put too much load on them. I think most have some protection circuit. But it's something to be aware of.
I'm looking at the diagram on page 5 here, posted by Kampen. Seems to me that the surge protector should plug directly into the kill-o-watt meter. Then the toaster would have one lead in left part of one outlet of the surge protector, and the other lead attached to one lead of the primary coil. Then then other lead of the primary coil will plug into the right part of the surge protector. Series. Does that not accomplish the inductance needed? Why have it that particular way in Kampen's configuration?
On Page 1, the circuit in the original diagram has one lead of the primary bypassing both the surge protector and the k-o-w meter, while the other lead connects with the neutral of the toaster in the surge protector.
If we are trying to get a certain level of inductance, what is the best method?
Sorry, it's been a long time since I worked with circuit diagrams and even longer since I used the theories.
May I will look into making a IC controller.
Mike
Quote from: SkyWatcher123 on March 29, 2011, 08:23:25 PM
Hi folks, I read the tesla patent #us433702 that might be similar to the gabriel device. Tesla says in his transformer, the outer primary shell creates a phase lag or time lag between the primary coil and secondary coil.
Kind of reminds of Thanes rotating generators where at certain speed a lag occurs, causing a repulsive kick to his moving magnets instead of a slow down.
This might explain why a load is not reflected back to the primary in gabriels device. Maybe the higher permeability inner toroid only helps to lengthen this phase or time lag between primary and secondary coil.
Also Tesla points out how his primary ferromagnetic shell will only transfer induction to secondary, if primary shell is saturated enough.
I think this sheds more light on what may be happening.
Even in Thanes design, it could very well be that the larger more permeable secondary transformer legs, only help to create a greater phase, time lag so that the loaded secondary coils do not reflect back to primary coil.
Anyway, here is my finished small gabriel device. I placed two layers of the 24 gauge for the primary coil.
peace love light
Tyson :)
I'm interested to see what happened with the steel on steel guy? Any news?
Sky, you still with us? =]
Mags
Hi folks, well I tried using the inverter into a smaller transformer then into the gabriel primary. The inner secondary did power a small lightbulb i have, though my voltage open circuit on the secondary was only 4.6 volts, though i expected that.
This inverter powering the intermediary transformer is sucking way too many amps. My small 7ah, 12volt sla can't cope, maybe they are not able to hold a heavy load much anymore.
So I tried the 110vac directly from the inverter to the gabriel primary and i heard a sparking sound inside the toroid and quickly disconnected it.
So this means I may have to put a resistance in line like mav did. Though even if i had put a load on the secondary like light bulbs, i don't think my battery has the guts anymore to power any high loads.
So what to do, not sure.
peace love light
Tyson :)
hey Sky
I think the toaster was used because the impedance was low for the freq used.
If you have a way to measure or do the process of finding where the impedance gets to a value that wont pull so much input.
A signal gen will be needed. Also if you have an old audio amp that you could risk sacrifice, you could run audio freq into the primary with input control(volume). It may just get ya there. Just pay attn to input and output as you make adjustments till you find a satisfactory freq and level.
Start high freq and work your way down.
If the working freq is high, the primary will have to have more windings till 60hz is the target.
wishing ya some cop. ;]
Mags
SkyWatcher123,
Forget the battery & inverter for now. The Primary Objective is to see if your design works.
1. For Safety & for a Current Limiter, just place a Toaster in series with 1 wire.
2. OR place a 200 W or 300 W Bulb in series with 1 wire.
3. OR place an Electric Blanket in series with 1 wire.
Either one will act as a current Limiter but still allow TESTING of your device.
Thank you for sharing.
.
Hi guys,
the toaster in series is needed because the primary doesn't have enough resistance/windings. It's like trying to run a 12V transformer on 220V, if you don't limit current you burn it.
What I'm suggesting is to take standard transformer windings/resistance relationships and apply them to what we're doing here. If you want to input 220V you have to have many windings. Go measure the resistance of a standard 220V transformer with a wattage similar to what you plan on using. The impedance at 60 Hz is very low and is not a big issue. Resistance is.
If one has a low winding/resistance primary he could go up in frequency in order to raise the impedance, if one wants to work with say 220V.
Mario
Quote from: wayne49s on March 25, 2011, 05:04:04 PM
@all
I talked to Jeff and he recommends anyone interested to send a purchase order. The item is called a magnet housing and is half of the toroid, so you need 2 pieces. There is a setup fee (maybe we can get this cheaper if he sets it up for all interested at the same time) and item cost (price is quantity dependent). They accept cheque or COD. His email is jeff@l-sindustries.com (there is a website).
I followed up with Jeff and he's telling me that it'll take a couple of more weeks to retool for the updated shell. I had thought the new tooling was done and Mav had got the new parts. In any case, I asked him to give me the pricing and he's suppose to do that before the retooling is done. I'll ask him to do all the requests in the coming 2 weeks at the same time to minimize the setup cost, if that is possible.
By the way, the Magnetec delivery is quick with DHL, got it in a couple of business days, with no customs issues here in Canada.
/Wayne
Skywatcher, Thanks for trying. I do think a 7 AH battery is way to small for doing anything with this and generally won't work for most inverters except maybe the smallest of them. You might be getting 40 or 50 watts usable power from a setup with a 7 Ah battery and that would be likely dropped to nil if a heavy load is put on it. That's my grab-off-the-wall guess anyway. And as others have said here it sounds like the resistance may be too low to safely run it the way it is now.
Feynman
How are things?
Chet
@all
Just got the feedback from Jeff. The price is not bad; cheaper if we can get 2 more people interested:
"
Finally I have this put together
Parts are $37.50 for 2 pcs of if you can purchase 10 pcs I can move the
price to $26.20 plus shipping.
Jones is taking 2, Dave is taking 2 and Wayne is taking 2 come up with 4
more.
We plan on running them to ship 4/22 all together
If you have any questions feel free to give me a call
Jeff Fruhling
L & S Industries Inc.
P.O. Box 1564, Kearney, NE 68848
4100 E. 39th Street, Kearney, NE 68847
"
/Wayne
Wayne,
Count me in for two (2).
I've been following this thread since it first came out and other than Bruce's TPU work I believe this holds the most promise. First effort will be to fabricate, using iron oxide, a suitable secondary. Then move on to the better ferrite core.
Will you PM me or how do we make contact?
Has anybody considered the effect of winding the primary in the fashion of Rodin? Just thinking out loud.
Quote from: casman1969 on April 07, 2011, 09:45:28 AM
Wayne,
Count me in for two (2).
I've been following this thread since it first came out and other than Bruce's TPU work I believe this holds the most promise. First effort will be to fabricate, using iron oxide, a suitable secondary. Then move on to the better ferrite core.
Will you PM me or how do we make contact?
Has anybody considered the effect of winding the primary in the fashion of Rodin? Just thinking out loud.
That's great! As far as the Rodin coil, Mav (David) worked on that without success. The first posts mentioned that.
Here's Jeff contact info:
Jeff Fruhling
L & S Industries Inc.
P.O. Box 1564, Kearney, NE 68848
4100 E. 39th Street, Kearney, NE 68847
308-236-5853 Phone
308-237-7786 Fax
jfruhling@l-sindustries.com
www.l-sindustries.com
You should give your info directly to him. And if no one else takes the last 2 piece, I'll take it so that we have the lower price.
/Wayne
Already placed the call and left a message. Will wait for his return call to get on his list and make $$$ arrangement. If you have other arrangement please let me know ASAP.
Glad to know I can strike the Rodin thought.
My stock of magnet wire includes a lot of 18 AWG but nothing bigger at present. Current rating of the 18 will probably preclude using it unless I can parrallel wind both coils. Any chance Litz wire could be utilized?
I take it the only hold up in replication is the steel primary shell. Is that correct?
@Casman
Ya, that's the case for me. I'll trying to validate the results with the same core material as Mav to have a baseline.
The cheapest place for magnet wire I found is at: http://www.magnet4less.com/
I'm actually planning to use #18 for the primary because it will have lower current, and #15 for the higher current, assuming we get a COP around 8.
/Wayne
Allright, back up to speed here. Faxing my request to Jeff now.
Will be happy to split the left over 2 with you Wayne.
Also I'm off grid, using 24V batteries, at 400 AH. There'll be no question if the COP is around 8, as I'll disconnect my solar panels and feed the output of Gabriel to the charge controllers going into the battery. The inverter output will feed the device input, and I plan to wire the secondary for around 60V center tap to convert it to DC for battery charging.
/Wayne
Quote from: casman1969 on April 07, 2011, 11:14:35 AM
Allright, back up to speed here. Faxing my request to Jeff now.
Will be happy to split the left over 2 with you Wayne.
Thanks for the offer, but no need... I may use the 2nd set for some fine tuning work after, using a different core. I'm confident the Gabriel device approach has merit.
/Wayne
Ditto on your last post. Center tap will be for my second unit but replication of the original device will be my first priority.
Glad to be in good company working on this.
Quote from: casman1969 on April 07, 2011, 11:35:51 AM
Ditto on your last post. Center tap will be for my second unit but replication of the original device will be my first priority.
Glad to be in good company working on this.
Yes, it's always good to have group support for something like this.
If all you change is the center tap, soldering it on in the first unit may save you some work to test it. I doubt it will change the replication results if you don't use it initially.
/Wayne
I was considering doing the center tap for both...
The original post says 1000' on the inner secondary and 800' on the primary. Are we still at those numbers if we use 16AWG?
Umm there may have been a mix up, on the innercore and outercore for this Im truly sorry, and accept responsibility for the mix up, so if you need to send bad karma my way you are fully within your rights.
I hope you can either get a exchange or find a way of producing your outershell.
It was brought to my attention that the cores didn't match up that the M-416 core would not fit in the outershell Im having made.
I took apart the transformer I had rigged up and did my own measurements and the measurements that I had Jeff take were correct and the part number I have been spouting across the board for the nanoperm is wrong.
Again Im sorry so sorry,
The Nanoperm size was the largest size that they offer not the next to largest size.
I can't believe I made this fatal mistake and I hope you all can forgive me.
Mav
Hopefully you can get it it exchanged without much problems and hopefully we didn't get 30 people buying cores.
Flame away....
Anyone can make a mistake but it takes fortitude to admit to it. Now I am somewhat confused though as to which part number would be the correct one to use. Did you mean the M-416 is too large? If so and some have that on order I would think getting the outer shell made larger (if possible) would save some rather expensive return shipping and lost time.
Can you clarify which part number would be the correct one or the dimensions? I'm not currently attempting this build but may try in the future and unless I'm the only one that isn't clear on this it will help others out.
its M-417 200od x 175id x 30tall mm
again im truly sorry about this
as well the M-416 won't fit in the outer core Im having produced the inner core is too small with wire on it....
M-417 will... I hope they do exchanges
Hi, I hardly ever post but tried Gabriel coil and followed to the letter, (the factory next door to me spins steel donuts ). I found no OU just a transformer, the toaster is probably 1kw like mine so watts in were 1350 on monitor bulbs on secondary 350W and second monitor reads 347. I was well disapointed .
Keith
Keith
can you post a pic?
Thanks
Chet
PS
Mavendex
Thanks for the "Man Up" !!
These "Bumps in the road" seem to happen sometimes despite our best intentions!!
Quote from: Mavendex on April 07, 2011, 07:44:07 PM
its M-417 200od x 175id x 30tall mm
again im truly sorry about this
These things happen; so just chalk it up to experience; won't make much difference in the long run.
I talked to the person that handle my order, and he will take back the core assuming it is undamaged.
/Wayne
Quote from: casman1969 on April 07, 2011, 02:46:40 PM
I was considering doing the center tap for both...
The original post says 1000' on the inner secondary and 800' on the primary. Are we still at those numbers if we use 16AWG?
I think that was what was mentioned, but not clear if the OU was confirmed with those new turn numbers. From the discussion on this thread and the Tesla info, my understanding of how it works is that the outer core needs to be operated in a saturated mode (in part of the sine wave cycle), so that some of the flux gets to the secondary. The secondary flux gets contained mostly to the inner core due to the higher permeability, and is also shielded somewhat by the outer core, so only a fraction of the BEMF reaches back to the primary coil, allowing for the OU characteristics. Now the number of primary turns impacts the inductance and the outer core saturation, so this is important according to the above understanding; some experimentation may be required here to optimize the OU.
/Wayne
Quote from: captainkt on April 08, 2011, 04:12:13 AM
Hi, I hardly ever post but tried Gabriel coil and followed to the letter, (the factory next door to me spins steel donuts ). I found no OU just a transformer, the toaster is probably 1kw like mine so watts in were 1350 on monitor bulbs on secondary 350W and second monitor reads 347. I was well disapointed .
Keith
I dont see how what you just described is a case for or against OU.
How did the input watts change when you plugged in the light bulb?
Could you tell us the following?
1. Input Watts of toaster on its own
2. Input Watts of toaster connected to primary (secondary disconnected)
3. Input Watts of toaster connected to primary, secondary has light plugged in.
Thanks
Looking forward to getting the shell and experimenting. 400' outer, 300' inner is a place to start but the variations and applications are what interest me the most. At best we can replicate as shown. At worst it may open other doors in the field of transformers. Either way, I'm pumped.
My first inner torroid will be round to, hopefully, maximize the transfer and will be fabricated from two part long curing epoxy and Iron oxide. I noticed the one on the first page of this thread was square in relation to the OD and ID. All I can find on the net are also square. If that is what works, great but I can't help but believe that round will maximize our transfer.
Quote from: captainkt on April 08, 2011, 04:12:13 AM
Hi, I hardly ever post but tried Gabriel coil and followed to the letter, (the factory next door to me spins steel donuts ). I found no OU just a transformer, the toaster is probably 1kw like mine so watts in were 1350 on monitor bulbs on secondary 350W and second monitor reads 347. I was well disapointed .
Keith
1340 watts input that's quite a bit mine is rated for 750 and I wasn't even able to pull that thru the primary it sat around 460 watts input with 400 feet of wire on, I was able to get consumption down to around 10 watts after adding more wire, maybe you saturated the outer core and stopped the magic from working, but it takes quite a bit to saturate, I have never been able to saturate the core so bad that the decoupling wouldn't work. So maybe its something in the build, remember that the outer core must completely envelop the inner core or you will have EMF interaction which will destabilize the decoupling that we are achieving.
Could you post a picture of your replication?
Mav
We should find a method to check BEMF from inner coil and adjust input power/frequency whatever, because it's easier to do that then to fix magnetic shield once made.
do you have any idea how to adjust this device ? This is crucial info, OU is always in method of adjustment.
For adjusting, may I suggest a ferrite rod approaching the center of the doughnut? This will affect the primary but since the secondary is encased in the steel it should have negligible effect on it.
Quote from: captainkt on April 08, 2011, 04:12:13 AM
Hi, I hardly ever post but tried Gabriel coil and followed to the letter, (the factory next door to me spins steel donuts ). I found no OU just a transformer, the toaster is probably 1kw like mine so watts in were 1350 on monitor bulbs on secondary 350W and second monitor reads 347. I was well disapointed .
Keith
hi
if the toaster connected series with the coil , and the coil works like an transformer, then it's impossible to reach nominal power (1000W+350w) at input, at nominal voltage. This values looks like the toaster and the bulbs are parallel
@ALL
Doing the impossible will be the topic
here
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=10595.msg281080#new
And Here
http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?PHPSESSID=02b7d77ded498f5d1675a165a0ac4156&topic=793.msg12899;topicseen
By EM Devices, A consummate professional !!
Expect great things!!
Chet
The nay sayer stated he hardly ever posts, true there its his first post since 12/09.
That was to diss this project. Troll in my book. No matter what you do here, there will
be total negative posts made and if you look, they usually are less than 10 posts total.
But he is a expert and tried it and it failed. Right.....
thay
Hi, Sorry if it came across as very negative, I built the devise in 4hrs start to finish because I had all the bits including a steel donut of the correct size. I am a long way from a troll, my workshop is littered with destroyed equipment, I have built dozens of coils etc over the last few years. I am trying to send pictures but am struggling with file size, donut picture is 1.3 meg and do not know how to send as attachment. I have not given up on Gabriel coil am trying with more windings on primary to get rid of dummy load, I had 440 on first attempt. Secondary no load voltage was 290 but loaded the voltage dropped and current rose as normal in
the primary.
Keith
Quote from: ramset on April 10, 2011, 07:51:17 AM
@ALL
Doing the impossible will be the topic
here
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=10595.msg281080#new
...
If I understand it correctly, the interpretation of EM's result is that there is OU in the operation of the core in the saturation region where the permeability is dropping (negative slope)! This is relevant for the Gabriel device operation. I did the analysis details at: http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=10595.0
/Wayne
Captain KT, Just save your photos in JPG format. If it is too big after you post it on O/U, you can just delete it & replace it with a smaller one until you are satisfied with how it looks.
If you don't have a Graphics Software Package, you can save it in JPG format using the Windows Paint program that comes with Windows.
Thank you for sharing your info.
.
Thanks will try
Hi donut Im using
Here you go - captaintk's donut. If you'd like you can just delete the supersize pic by editing your post.
Quote from: captainkt on April 08, 2011, 04:12:13 AM
Hi, I hardly ever post but tried Gabriel coil and followed to the letter, (the factory next door to me spins steel donuts ). I found no OU just a transformer, the toaster is probably 1kw like mine so watts in were 1350 on monitor bulbs on secondary 350W and second monitor reads 347. I was well disapointed .
Keith
@captainkt
From the picture, it doesn't look like it's large enough to contain the same inner core, which is about 8" diameter. What is the type and size of the inner core you are using?
/Wayne
Hmm, I see Capt Steel Toroid but I don't see any wires? I take it this is a before photo you took before you built it in 4 hours?
Hi,
5 inch inner core from ferrite toroid transformer, I can get a larger donut (up to18inch) if you think a larger size might work. It would certainly be easier to wind with larger diameter centre hole.
regards
Keith
Quote from: captainkt on April 12, 2011, 04:34:11 AM
Hi,
5 inch inner core from ferrite toroid transformer, I can get a larger donut (up to18inch) if you think a larger size might work. It would certainly be easier to wind with larger diameter centre hole.
regards
Keith
The point is that it is not an exact duplicate of the original device, so you don't really know what are the changes that caused it to give different results. For example, Mav mentioned that an iron powder variation did not work. That's why the quickest way to validate is often to validate with exactly the same parameters as the original to get your own working reference from which you can experiment, rather than to use the parts you have available. Once the parameters are changed, and it doesn't work, you end up with the situation where you do not have a sure way to make it work other than to remake the device exactly. Double the work with half the confidence.
/Wayne
Fair comment, over the last few years I have made dozens of builds,nearly all Kapanadze type and just seen effects mostly with exploding equipment, perhaps this time I should take your advice.
/Keith
Quote from: captainkt on April 12, 2011, 07:37:06 AM
Fair comment, over the last few years I have made dozens of builds,nearly all Kapanadze type and just seen effects mostly with exploding equipment, perhaps this time I should take your advice.
/Keith
You didn't have a choice with that device; look at the total unsuccessful effort on this forum. That's why we should be very appreciative of Mav's generosity with full disclosure and open source; so why not take advantage of it.
/Wayne
Cheers, will do
Keith
Edit: sorry, I noticed you already answered my question.
Hi guys I have not been on for awhile, a friend of mine scientist, reconds that I should look into this divice he thinks that it may have a chance of working.
looks like you all have been working hard, just somthing the steel shell around the inner core, think it is to stop the induced magnetic field from the outer that is induced into the inner core coil from EXCAPING outwards it folds back the feild.
this is somtimes used on solenoid coils to increse there perfomance. well just some thoughts, has any one got one going yet?
@aussepow
This thread is meant to validate David's results. No one's come forward with a replication yet, but the original announcement came from PESWiki:
http://pesn.com/2011/03/20/9501793_Two_Toroid_Over-Unity_Gabriel_Device_--_Part_1/
There's at least 5 people that have ordered the steel shell that is holding up the replication, due to be delivered before end of month, so expect results to start coming in at that point.
/Wayne
Eagerly anticipating the arrival of my steel doughnut casings. Guess I should now ask if we have agreement on the secondary ferrite ring so that I can order that as well. I'm in the US.
MAV seems to have settled on the 417. Is that correct for size?
it should be the right size, I took apart my transformer and measured with wire on its the correct size for the shell. there is a 517 that is the same core just epoxied and not encased in plastic which would also fit that shell.
mave
The permeability of the ferrite is too low. Plain and simple. It will release the flux back into the primary/outer core.
Quote from: wayne49s on April 12, 2011, 07:22:39 AM
The point is that it is not an exact duplicate of the original device, so you don't really know what are the changes that caused it to give different results. For example, Mav mentioned that an iron powder variation did not work. That's why the quickest way to validate is often to validate with exactly the same parameters as the original to get your own working reference from which you can experiment, rather than to use the parts you have available. Once the parameters are changed, and it doesn't work, you end up with the situation where you do not have a sure way to make it work other than to remake the device exactly. Double the work with half the confidence.
/Wayne
I just E-Mailed Sales at Magnetec (Karl, 'kkraft@magnetec.de') asking where I can purchase a couple of the Naoperm m-417 toroids. Does anyone here already have that contact established? Went through most of the previous posts but can't find that reference. Guess I should have asked my wife to find it as she has the ability to look in the same places I do and find stuff I was looking for...
Quote from: casman1969 on April 14, 2011, 06:09:06 PM
I just E-Mailed Sales at Magnetec (Karl, 'kkraft@magnetec.de') asking where I can purchase a couple of the Naoperm m-417 toroids. Does anyone here already have that contact established? Went through most of the previous posts but can't find that reference. Guess I should have asked my wife to find it as she has the ability to look in the same places I do and find stuff I was looking for...
The following is their US distributor, the shipping may be cheaper:
Quote from: kampen on March 23, 2011, 07:38:56 PM
@ All,
MAGNETEC Sales in USA
MH&W International Corp.
14 Leighton Place
Mahwah, NJ 07430 USA
Fon: +1(201) 891 8800
Fax: +1(201) 891 0625
magnetec@mhw-intl.com
http://www.mhw-intl.com
Dear Casman,
Pooled order for M-417 Toroidal Core MAGNETEC dim. 200x175x30mm
in case you are living in Europe then I can supply you these cores. Price 180,00 euro each.
We have pooled this order.
Free shipping within the European Postal Zone.
Let me know if you are interested.
Best regards,
Alex Jansen
kampen
Thanks Wayne,
Just got off the phone with them and they do not have it in stock here in the states but will in a couple of days. They will both phone and E-Mail me when they come in but didn't have US dollar pricing for me yet. I'm still waiting for the steel doughnut so, with any luck, both will arrive around the same time.
Again, thank you for the info.
Been catching up, reading this thread. I too will be happy to attempt to duplicate these results. One question Mav, in your photos of the winding for the secondary, it looks like it is a different type of wire than what you used for the primary, even though you say they are both 16AWG. Is it simply the insulation that is different?
I live in the States, PA. Looking forward to seeing results of others once the materials arrive.
Its a Tinned copper wire with tephlon coating on the primary secondary is just magnet wire.
Quote from: Mavendex on April 18, 2011, 08:23:50 AM
Its a Tinned copper wire with tephlon coating on the primary secondary is just magnet wire.
Based on some things I recall from many years ago that may be significant that one is a tinned teflon coated wire. I'd suggest others trying this replication use this combination as Mavendex has done if possible.
From my local supplier of Magnetec:
Magnetec forwarded your request to MH&W International. We are a domestic source of supply in partnership with Magnetec GmbH to provide nanocrystalline magnetic materials, as well as other magnetic components.
I am actually located in Atlanta. However, MH&W operations are located in Mahwah, NJ.
The M-417 isn’t a part that we have in stock. I have requested 2 samples of the part from Magnetec on your behalf. I will advise you of the response as soon as I hear back from them.
In the meantime, I am attaching our line card for your review. If you’d like to browse our website, please do. The web address is http://www.mhw-intl.com/.
If I may be of assistance to you, please feel free to reach out to me. Thanks for your inquiry.
Good Morning!
I have a response from the factory. There is stock in Germany. However, due to the cost of the parts, they are unable to send the parts free of charge.
The cost will be $310 per part. If you would like to proceed with the purchase, please let me know and I will advise you of the next steps. Thanks for your inquiry.
Any suggestions folks?
I'm slowly building replication of Tesla induction device. I don't know if that works the same but at least is much cheaper ;D
Costs me around $40 for 4 garden steel wires 20m and 30m copper wire 1.5mm^2
One very bad thing is that I have no core so I wound one garden wire into toroid and made a core he he :P
I touched on this problem early in the thread. One could make their own core using layers of material like mumetal, permalloy, etc. or by setting magnetite sand in a resin and shaping to suit. The latter will cost you at most $30.
Cheers,
Twinbeard
Quote from: casman1969 on April 19, 2011, 01:54:58 PM
Good Morning!
I have a response from the factory. There is stock in Germany. However, due to the cost of the parts, they are unable to send the parts free of charge.
The cost will be $310 per part. If you would like to proceed with the purchase, please let me know and I will advise you of the next steps. Thanks for your inquiry.
Any suggestions folks?
Yes,I saw that but in the interest of trying my best to duplicate with what alledgedly works (Nanoperm) I pursued this material.
Since the cost factor is so high I will revert back to plan B for now...
Fabricate my own.
I am unfamiliar with using and layering the other materials but it is another avenue.
The reason the nanoperm works is because it has a much higher permeability than the outer cold rolled steel. As long as you respect that variable, the device should do the trick. Here are my two strategies on this:
Layer material like this, which has a high permeability also:
http://www.goldmine-elec-products.com/prodinfo.asp?number=G16600A
This will make your inner core. Wrap the coils, then apply a layer or two of fine iron filings/powder in a resin on top of that, then wind outer coils.
The second part is the same in the magnetite version, although the inner core would be cast in the resin with high permeability magnetite sand instead the layered material.
Another option for the outer core would be a couple layers of windings of iron wire, perhaps.
For the most esoteric option, tho it might be costly as well, is to take a hollow plastic donut and fill it with ferrofluid, using that as the inner core. Thats all the brainstorm I have for the moment.
Cheers,
Twinbeard
Quote from: casman1969 on April 19, 2011, 03:52:02 PM
Yes,I saw that but in the interest of trying my best to duplicate with what alledgedly works (Nanoperm) I pursued this material.
Since the cost factor is so high I will revert back to plan B for now...
Fabricate my own.
I am unfamiliar with using and layering the other materials but it is another avenue.
I used plan C :D Everything from cheap steel plastic coated garden wire. I bet ordinary ferrite core would be better but I have no such with so big diameter.
I don't expect anything extra maybe a bit less input power ?
@casman
Wow, that is a bit too pricey for me right now too. hmmm....
@twinbeard
I do have some materials from a magnetic shielding project I was involved with, mumetal, and in particluar Vitrovac 6025X. I don't have the permeability stats on hand but perhaps that may be a good alternative for me to make the secondary core with?
Hard drive magnets on MuMetal ???
Have a bunch of them and I'm thinking about melting them down, along with the magnets and making a toroid out of that. Thinking out loud again...
I have already made my 1/2" diameter form (round) for the magnetite and epoxy so, for now, I'll just have to work with what I've got. Wish my steel dougnut would get here (arrgggghhhh).
Quote from: netpoint on April 19, 2011, 04:26:01 PM
@twinbeard
I do have some materials from a magnetic shielding project I was involved with, mumetal, and in particluar Vitrovac 6025X. I don't have the permeability stats on hand but perhaps that may be a good alternative for me to make the secondary core with?
that would probably work pretty well. inner core permeability > outer core permeability.
Quote from: forest on April 19, 2011, 02:05:34 PM
I'm slowly building replication of Tesla induction device. I don't know if that works the same but at least is much cheaper ;D
Costs me around $40 for 4 garden steel wires 20m and 30m copper wire 1.5mm^2
One very bad thing is that I have no core so I wound one garden wire into toroid and made a core he he :P
Havnt seen Sky around? I wonder if maybe there should be some space between the primary outer core, and the secondary windings. I know the secondary fields tend to want to stay with the denser core its wound around, but i imagine if the outer core were very close, right on top of the secondary, there must be some interaction.
The same interaction that simply more secondary windings would encounter.
Do the shells that you guys are using make physical contact with the inner secondary windings? What suspends the inner coil in the outer shell?
So Forest, maybe try some way to make some space between the secondary and the outer core. I dont have the pat pic in front of me. Does it show or say of any spacing? It will to your discretion. if its not too difficult to make, try both.
Hope that helps
Mags
Was thinking about heat buildup to the inner core.
I suppose once there is a good design, the shells could be sealed with an oil for coolant.
If there needs to be that space between the inner core and the shell, the heat would build quick running 800w or so.
Now for the further developed shell, we need 2 shells. Both the inner and outer shells have holes drilled everywhere and when the shells are put together, you cant see any of the inner shell holes by looking into the outer shell holes, by having a pattern that is different for the inner and outer shell. But there is enough space between the inner and outer shells to carry air to the "INNER CHAMBER"
lol
So as long as the inner coil cant see the primary, all is good, and cooling with cheese. ;]
Then a plastic shroud with a small cooling fan will do nicely.
Just tinkin
Mags
Why the big spam? Hmmm? ;]
In reference to the front page Wow spammer
Mags
Mags
Inner core made from 20m steel wire coated (garden), wound into toroid shape.
Next bifilar copper coil around. Next some layer of paper mass and electrical tap insulation. Next two layers of rings made from the same garden steel wire (coated).Next electrical tape and primary - ordinary coil wound around toroid.
At least a lot of fun and time spent , a lot of hours winding that damn shell. >:(
Not yet finished
Hi magluvin, I'm still around, was just testing another project.
Hi forest, thanks for sharing your setup so far, looks good.
I am wondering now if i should have wound my steel garden wire primary shell like Tesla and forest are doing it.
Though it would be difficult and there would be an open space on the inner part of toroid.
I think by threading the steel wire through the toroid, it caused the flux to not flow properly, maybe that's why Tesla specifically said 90 degrees to secondary wire.
Well i can unwind the outer primary and redo the steel wire shell and wire it around the circumference as Tesla says, what do you folks think.
peace love light
tyson :)
Hey Sky
I really liked your work on that, and Forests. ;]
But I think your right. I think yours was wound in a way that currents could flow in the outer core. Even though its not connected, it may be an issue.
I see that forest used tie wraps to enable the threading of the iron wire this way. Lil genius. ;]
I know its a lot of work and patients. After a while, it gets easier.
I would follow Teslas way, and also use as many layers as shown to fill the gaps.
Mags
Quote from: forest on April 20, 2011, 05:01:14 AM
Mags
Inner core made from 20m steel wire coated (garden), wound into toroid shape.
Next bifilar copper coil around. Next some layer of paper mass and electrical tap insulation. Next two layers of rings made from the same garden steel wire (coated).Next electrical tape and primary - ordinary coil wound around toroid.
At least a lot of fun and time spent , a lot of hours winding that damn shell. >:(
hey Forest
Your doing a great job making all wire cores. Looks like factory. ;]
I hope the bifi works well. And it gives you the alternative to just parallel the windings. So you get 2 choices of windings without rebuild. ;]
If you have a signal gen, you can find the resonant freq of each choice of winding.
Some of the designs may have operational freq issues.
But all that needs to be done is find that freq and make circuitry to accommodate those frequencies. From there with data known, a new build can be figured for near 60hz operation.
Off topic a bit, but was just thinking while writing, I wonder how a ferromagnetic fluid core would work.
mags
Just thought of maybe a simpler way to build this thing.
Start with a rod core, for example 5in long 1in thick.
Wind the rod with the secondary.
Then use a pipe, say 2in dia 5in long.
Slide the sec with core in the pipe.
Close pipe ends, making sure the inner core touches the pipe ends.
Then wind the primary around the pipe.
As long as the sec field lines dont cross the primary windings, and stay in the core/pipe, it should work the same.
It would make things a lot easier and quicker. ;]
Mags
Hi magluvin, laying in bed yesterday last night i was thinking the exact same thing, using a solenoid type core, good idea to try.
Though I decided to start even smaller, to make changes quicker and easier to try different setups.
I have these small ferrite beads, about 1" diameter X 1-1/4" long.
I was thinking about first trying a threaded secondary through toroid bead, then winding 90 degree steel wire around that, then thread primary bifilar with option for joule thief pulsing.
Another setup to try is winding secondary around ferrite toroid bead, then thread steel wire 90 degrees through ferrite bead toroid, then wrap primary bifilar around primary shell.
Will not take long to test these ideas out and see the results.
peace love light
tyson ;)
Forest has Mad skills!!
It does look factory made!!
Chet
Thanks for friendly comments! It really took very long time to make it using such hand method.
Mags,
I like your idea and I evolved it even more.I don't know if this is possible but using two PVC hoses would dramatically speed up production of such transformers like I'm making.
First I think smaller hose should be filled with powdered or liquid ferrite or simply by thin iron wires, then still on this PVC in straight position secondary could be wound. Next time slide bigger PVC hose on it,maybe filling gaps between wire turns and PVC by some non-conducting mass and electrical tape.After that building shield with iron wires around is probably much easier, just use holding strips rubber strips and slide cut wire pieces around, tight around with electrical tape again.Now the critical moment is to shape it in toroid and glue ends. If that succeeded then last thing is to wind primary around.
Hope you see what I imagined.
Hi folks, I finished the first setup using the inner ferrite bead toroid with one layer of 24 gauge wrapped around the toroid solenoid style, then electrical tape.
Then I threaded steel craft wire through the toroid to make primary shell, then electrical tape.
Then I wrapped primary bifilar over shell solenoid style, just like inner secondary, though using two layers so that the turn count matches the inner secondary turns.
I plan to try joule thief or Bedini type self oscillators and other possible methods.
Will be testing later tonight.
peace love light
tyson :)
@all,
I got word that L&S Industries was shipping the outer donut cores out today; so for the people that ordered it, it's on its way!
Looking forward to getting them.., big time.
Like others before me, the variations of testing keep flowing through my mind.
Hate to admit it but I'm envious of those in Europe who have been able to locate and secure those secondary Nanoperm torroids. I'll be paying close attention to their results.
Quote from: wayne49s on April 21, 2011, 03:34:14 PM
@all,
I got word that L&S Industries was shipping the outer donut cores out today; so for the people that ordered it, it's on its way!
They are exceptional, fits oh so perfect no gaps, and I have my first layer of tinned wire on there I will test tonight to see if we have the effects in place.
Hi All,
If I remember correctly, there was a question of a tuning method on this device. Most of the tuning happens in the build, and in the selection of materials. The only way that I could think of to tune on the fly would be to a) vary the input frequency or b) put some centertaps in your windings, like a Dunwoody crystal radio.
Cheers,
Twinbeard
Quote from: Mavendex on April 21, 2011, 07:36:03 PM
They are exceptional, fits oh so perfect no gaps, and I have my first layer of tinned wire on there I will test tonight to see if we have the effects in place.
Cool! Looking forward to your results. Best of luck.
Tuning is crucial I think. All free energy devices I saw on videos are quite simple but the proper method of tuning make it work in OU range. Without tuning it's just a curious shaped toy :D
Quote from: forest on April 22, 2011, 04:32:36 AM
Tuning is crucial I think. All free energy devices I saw on videos are quite simple but the proper method of tuning make it work in OU range. Without tuning it's just a curious shaped toy :D
Ill agree with this statement...
First Try. Primary wound towards and to the right
120vac.05 amps primary (light bulb) - 60volts unloaded secondary
120vac2.5 amps primary (toaster)- 177volts unloaded secondary
2 layers of Primary windings .9 ohms
Acted like a normal transformer
Second Try. Primary wound away and to the left
1 layer of Primary windings .4 ohms
120vac.5 amps primary (light bulb) - 107volts unloaded secondary
120vac 5.2 amps primary (toaster) - voltage arced on the secondary and shorted to the core, intresting since my insulated windings are the very outermost layer of the secondary core and can handle 600 volts... so even if it arced and fried my windings on the inside it should not be shorting to the outercore.
Ill have to take it apart to find out what exactly happened I did hear a sizzle sizzle on the inside when it charged. most likely have to rewind the secondary with less mag wire and more insulated.
So far its quite exciting :)
Mav
Something sticks in my mind that I'm sure I read somewhere in regards to real OU devices. It was something about making sure you always having a load on the output. I'm vague on exactly where it came from and so it may or may not apply here but considering the results maybe you need a load on it before even firing it up?
Hi Mav,
Good progress, its a pity it arced before you could add the load.
I have a few smaller Magnetec cores to test with and I will be encasing the secondary in a thin mu-metal shield.
I need to try and get some transformer steel next week from work. This should be ok to cut with aviation snips.
As long as I can show the same effect of reducing the primary current while increasing the secondary load then I will be happy to progress onto a mild steel donut such as the one you are using.
Would it be possible to get one made up from the same place you had yours done if I put some money towards your tooling cost?
Thanks
Meggerman
Guys, a remark on the frying of the secondary.
I am not sure about your winding ratio (see my reply #88 in this thread), but there's another reason why high voltage is occurring at the secondary winding.
The permeability of the secondary is very high relative to the primary.
This means that even if the winding ratio is 1:1, the coil values are not 1:1 but they need to be multiplied by the permeability ratio too.
This makes this transformer a high voltage one. So, be careful !!
Hello everyone,
QuoteThis means that even if the winding ratio is 1:1, the coil values are not 1:1 but they need to be multiplied by the permeability ratio too.
This makes this transformer a high voltage one. So, be careful !!
The permeability act only on the magnetizing current not on the voltage which is defined by the winding ratio, coupling coefficient (k)...
Low permeability = high reluctance = high magnetizing current...
High permeability = low reluctance = low magnetizing current...
A circuit with a high reluctance and low reluctance coupled together have high magnetizing current...
A trick for the Gabriel device is to put a "Reactor" (a reactor is a AC ballast preferably linear ballast (air gapped ballast) in serie with the input side to limit reactive current without dissipating real energy in the taoster...
I have made a lot of FEMM simulation and I have theorized a new device based Heins effect...
Quote from: Mavendex on April 22, 2011, 12:03:47 PM
...
voltage arced on the secondary and shorted to the core, intresting since my insulated windings are the very outermost layer of the secondary core and can handle 600 volts... so even if it arced and fried my windings on the inside it should not be shorting to the outercore.
...
Make sure the two halves of the outer shell are not shorted/touching, otherwise it is equivalent to a shorted huge 1 wire loop secondary. It needs to be insulated at the joining edge.
/Wayne
Wayne,
Thanks for that info as I would have provided a path between the halves. You, most likely, saved me a lot of unwinding :) :)
Yup that was it, insulated the halves from each other and the effect has been replicated.
Enjoy!!!
Ill get back with results after easter my job is extremely demanding till then
Mav
Quote from: Mavendex on April 23, 2011, 05:31:05 PM
Yup that was it, insulated the halves from each other and the effect has been replicated.
Enjoy!!!
Ill get back with results after easter my job is extremely demanding till then
Mav
Great to see success with the new unit Mav and glad you solved the issue! ANYONE - Sorry I'm not clear on this and need to ask. Does this mean the wiring inside needs better insulation from the metal donut or is this a reference to the donut itself needing the top half insulated from the bottom half ? I apologize I haven't been following real close here but I am very interested and will try this when I can afford a high perm core.
Mavendex
Savoring the moment :)
Thanks for persevering !
Chet
Quote from: e2matrix on April 23, 2011, 05:52:04 PM
...Does this mean the wiring inside needs better insulation from the metal donut or is this a reference to the donut itself needing the top half insulated from the bottom half? ...
The latter, as the donut is a huge secondary wire.
I'll have to wait a week to get my donut because they don't accept COD from Canada or charge card, but glad Mav got the expected results... everything looks good going forward.
/Wayne
Hi, but what is this radio silence?
Is the replication working?
Mavendex where are you?
Finally!!!!
Steel dougnut arrived today. Now I know the size of my secondary torrid and can begin to build it. As with others I must juggle my time. Between my company, civic duty and waging war on an out of control, completely corrupt Judiciary in TN it is getting harder and harder to create research time. But this one holds so very much promise that I just can't wait to begin.
Don't equate others silience with inaction...
Quote from: Elisha on April 25, 2011, 03:54:02 PM
Hi, but what is this radio silence?
Is the replication working?
Mavendex where are you?
I think its safe to say, build it. ;]
Mags
Quote from: aaron5120 on April 27, 2011, 12:58:43 AM
Hi, @Mavendex,
I have been reading quietly this thread so far, and did not post anything here. But I am very interested to try replicate your latest resuts of the Gabriel Device Version2.0
I have some crucial questions to ask before I proceed to buy the components for the replication, which are not cheap. If you don't mind, here they are:
1) The primary should be tin plated copper wire, insulated in plastic, AWG #24, one layer, wounded counter clockwise( from right to left, in opposite direction of the clock hands), right?
2) The primary core shoud be soft iron toroida halves, those used in the exhaust tubing( donuts) ?
3) These halves shoud be insulated one from the other i order to prevent arcing from the secondaries windings, right?
4) The secondary windings will be 300 turns of AWG24 magnet wire wounded clockwise( from left to right, in the direction of the clock hands), right?
5) How to calculate the proportion of wires used both in the primary and the secondary? How many turns in the primary for how many turns to the secondary?
6)The device operates basically in the 50Hz/60Hz frequency of the public grid, right?
7) The toaster's purpose is to limit current flow in the primary, as a resistive current limiting component, right?
8) The secondary loading should be strictly resistive, such as common light bulbs, right?
9) There is no need for impedance matching for the secondary loading, right?
For the benefit of all the replicators in the thread, it would very nice if you can answer these questions openly in a public post in the Gabrial device thread.
Thanks a lot, and please keep on experimenting, and we appreciate you very much for open sourcing this discovery.
aaron5120
Hello I will answer as best as I can,
This version with the new shell needs to be recalibrated for wire and what not I did change more than one variable and have to compensate for these changes, be assured for every 1 watt in we get 12 out thus far.
1)the primary I have found, should no longer be tin plated copper and normal magnet wire will work better in this instance of the new shell, optimal sizing of wire is still being experimented with I have wound it counter clockwise and towards myself it does make a difference if you are winding away or towards your self, the toroidal halves
2) I am useing are mild steel or cold rolled steel, feel free to experiment with other metals as this is a cage.
3)yes the halves should insulate from each other other wise the effect is no longer present
4)The direction of the primary is the same as the secondary as far as winding, conventional winding ratios are out the window, how ever much is on the secondary has a ceiling applied and will always be present. currently I have 3.1 ohms of resistance 16 awg wire on the secondary which is yielding a ceiling of 180 volts
5)on this current size and still needs to be calculated and restructured as far as the math goes but as is with current setup 97 turns of the primary will get you to the sweet spot, again winding ratios calculations for conventional transformers are null
6)yes that is how I made it although I do plan to experiment with other frequencies for other projects
7)yes the toaster is my limiter, I will be changing that soon
8)yes to measure your output I would use light bulbs, wear sunglasses and have a meter (be advised if you turn off the secondary before the primary you will get a backspike)
9)impedance matching as far as I know there is no need, again the device is being recalibrated
I am posting these questions in good faith and hope everyone's replications can match or exceed what I have done.
Be aware patent application is being filed on this device for commercial benefit and to get the ball rolling a bit quicker I am doing this with Thane Heins, also be aware I believe everyone has the right to free energy, and if you replicate/duplicate for your own self and supply power for your own self and build it your own self without making money and saving money doesn't equal making money, that is quite alright with me more power to ya. If you so choose that you would like to make money with these devices I would contact either myself or Thane to setup licensing which he has a well thought out agreement that is mutually beneficial for all parties involved.
Dave
Mavendex
Although I understand your motivation (even more now when I became unemployed) I think you cannot patent it because it was patented by Tesla. You can patent your embodiment but still I think it's not fair.
For example I want to test other embodiment with another slightly different arrangement (like secondary bifilar coil for example) and ideas which I think were used previously (but not patented due to suppression) and your patent would shutdown the way for me to sell it locally.
However I respect you and your decision.I believe you are honest person.
P.S. Once I had a dream. A dream about a couple of friends from OU forum working together inventing and producing device which will help poor people a little. And they invest their time and efforts and money to invent another device even more useful.
Telsas patent doesn't represent anything that is being displayed here if he had OU at the time we would be useing it now....
By adding new technology and changing how the physics of the device work it is quite novel as has been discussed by multiple peoples and they pushed me in that direction because I can't depend upon humans to not take advantage of this. I put my time my money and resources in to it, developed it, and produced not 1 but 2 working prototypes, I think it is very fair that which was stated if you don't want to have a electric bill good deal get rid of that, that is my gift to you and all the other people on the planet basically I just handed you 200 bucks a month for the rest of your life. and if you want to make money off of it fine just give me a small piece of the pie you will be wealthy I will be wealthy and everyone can be a happy camper its mutually beneficial and no one gets taken advantage of but you have to have a license.
Also this has other applications as a magnetic diode, and possibly lifter technology not just for free energy.
It has been discussed that we can reclaim the patent if it comes to that but by adding new tech it is a different animal.
Its not fair you say..... I think Im being extremely fair if not super generous if you had a family to take care of, a dead end job that in this day in age you would probably never get out of, and living paycheck to paycheck to keep things met and help you all out in the process you would have a different idea about it im sure.
Its not up for discussion.
Mav
Mavs
You are a wonderful man!!
Thank you ,
Chet
With regards to patents, I can add my two cents based on my experience at a company that was producing about 100+ patents a year and I did have my name on 6 commercial patents (most of it was written by lawyers).
Anyone can tried to patent something. Forest may give his opinion on the matter, but if Mav does not think it is valid, he can tried to patent it. It's up to the patent officer to do the search and see whether it was patented before and/ or if it is valid. I don't know if there is a process for someone to object before it is patented, but more often than not, it is usually done after by different parties having interest in the patent when it has been shown to have commercial value. Some examples of patents are the flip phone by Motorola.. at one time, they were asking $10 (maybe it was $50), but the cost drove the other vendors to use their own mechanism (that's why there were many different ones at one time).
I read Thane's patent, and the format is not very clear. It is very important to state what are your claims for the patent, and this is not made clear in Thane's patent.. it seems to be merged with the general description without a clear differentiation of background info, and patent claims. A more proper format can be seen in Tesla's or ones produced by patent lawyers. The registration cost is not so expensive (which is the main cost if you do it yourself), but for corporations using lawyers, it's around $20,000-$30,000 (too much for me to figure out where the money went, but that's usually the case when lawyers are involved). As an example, Ericsson bypassed Motorola's flip phone patent by using a flip without a switch at one time (Motorola's patent flip activated a switch also). It is a money and lawyer's game, part of the capitalist system, which I believe will soon collapse with the present civilization right in front of our eyes due to seen and un-foreseen events.
Oh if it wasn't clear, Mav has a novel device and it is probably patentable from my experience.
Quote from: wayne49s on April 27, 2011, 01:21:15 PM
With regards to patents, I can add my two cents based on my experience at a company that was producing about 100+ patents a year and I did have my name on 6 commercial patents (most of it was written by lawyers).
Anyone can tried to patent something. Forest may give his opinion on the matter, but if Mav does not think it is valid, he can tried to patent it. It's up to the patent officer to do the search and see whether it was patented before and/ or if it is valid. I don't know if there is a process for someone to object before it is patented, but more often than not, it is usually done after by different parties having interest in the patent when it has been shown to have commercial value. Some examples of patents are the flip phone by Motorola.. at one time, they were asking $10 (maybe it was $50), but the cost drove the other vendors to use their own mechanism (that's why there were many different ones at one time).
I read Thane's patent, and the format is not very clear. It is very important to state what are your claims for the patent, and this is not made clear in Thane's patent.. it seems to be merged with the general description without a clear differentiation of background info, and patent claims. A more proper format can be seen in Tesla's or ones produced by patent lawyers. The registration cost is not so expensive (which is the main cost if you do it yourself), but for corporations using lawyers, it's around $20,000-$30,000 (too much for me to figure out where the money went, but that's usually the case when lawyers are involved). As an example, Ericsson bypassed Motorola's flip phone patent by using a flip without a switch at one time (Motorola's patent flip activated a switch also). It is a money and lawyer's game, part of the capitalist system, which I believe will soon collapse with the present civilization right in front of our eyes due to seen and un-foreseen events.
I know it costs lots of money and lawyers, Thane has said that these things are possible as well but in the current state it would only be prudent to cover all my bases hence why I keep releasing information, I have investors as soon as thane gets the transformer he has investors we are good to go in the financial dept. Plus I have a plan to move forward even if Im not awarded the patent. A good ninja never tells all his secrets.
If I were to clamp up and let you all figure it out which Im sure you can now that you know the basic componets the tech will be used. Even if they gag it up drag thier feet or what ever would get in the way. The most important thing here is that alot of people know how to build it, can build it the parts arn't too expensive and can be optimized, now that the horses are out of the gate you can't bring them back home, The world will change this has been insured, now I have to think about myself and my family.
Earth will change, society will change, we have only the future to look forward too.
Mav
@Mav
I would try to patent it too.. you've done more than most.. just don't sell your rights to some one that will shelve it. Put in performance clauses if they want any exclusivity.
good luck! :)
/Wayne
The more I see discussions about patents the more I believe this world collapse will be soon.
I don't want to be rich, I just hate the situation when somebody from small village is inventing device based on limited freely information from a document or newspaper or old patent ,and he is said he cannot sell it locally to pay his bills and buy food , just because it was patented somewhere abroad .Just that. A reward for inventor is good thing as like the reward for hard worker. If two inventors are working independently on similar ideas but only one has ability to patent the idea,the other cannot do anything with his hard work ? Is that OK ? Isn't that an evil side of patents ?
Anyway my device was never based on Gabriel device but on Tesla patent and Tesla and my ideas (if you follow my comments you see I never wanted to copy Gabriel device or replicate.It was a seed for my thoughts)
So I started this new thread http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=10666.new#new and will not post here, just to be not misunderstand. Please forgive me if I offended somebody , English is not my natural language.
I wish you all good luck and many replications.
Quote from: forest on April 27, 2011, 02:30:54 PM
The more I see discussions about patents the more I believe this world collapse will be soon.
I don't want to be rich, I just hate the situation when somebody from small village is inventing device based on limited freely information from a document or newspaper or old patent ,and he is said he cannot sell it locally to pay his bills and buy food , just because it was patented somewhere abroad .Just that. A reward for inventor is good thing as like the reward for hard worker. If two inventors are working independently on similar ideas but only one has ability to patent the idea,the other cannot do anything with his hard work ? Is that OK ? Isn't that an evil side of patents ?
Anyway my device was never based on Gabriel device but on Tesla patent and Tesla and my ideas (if you follow my comments you see I never wanted to copy Gabriel device or replicate.It was a seed for my thoughts)
So I started this new thread http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=10666.new#new and will not post here, just to be not misunderstand. Please forgive me if I offended somebody , English is not my natural language.
I wish you all good luck and many replications.
And this is why we patent....
Mavs
So if the Gov't schmucks put a Gag on your patent [security crap]
Your feeling is Its already out there so who cares ?,or can A patent
That has been "gagged" Cause problems for folks who "Just use it around the house" because it has already gone through the "secutity Process" and Been deemed "a Crime" to do or use??
Just wondering about the patent thing and security laws,and trying not to Help the Idiots that have been suppressing these things for so long
By handing it to them on a silver patent [platter]?
If it never gets patented it has no "ID" how can you enforce a law against something with no "ID"?
Patent it and it has an"ID".
I hope I'm making my point??[not to confusing]
Chet
Ya thats my thinking is you guys and probably about 20 other people know how to build it, with that information I could be gagged but that wouldn't stop you guys even if its patented.
Plus thanes bitt didn't get gagged, and since Im partnering up with the original researcher they would have to gag him too but all his info is out there as well that would mean 10000's man hours just to clean up the net not to mention the fact that they would have to find every single individual we every talked to and gag them as well and since the net allows us to go far and wide all over the world they can't stop it. they have very little on what to say in maumbi or bali or any other place that is not under us jurisdiction.
Its out there you guys can build it and if it gets gagged mod the hell out of it!
I think Panacea University has an article (but I couldn't find it at the moment) about how NOT to go about getting an invention out into real world use or how not to have the world get the opportunity to see it and use it. It's a good read. You might also be aware of the US Patent office SAWS program. Document attached and very pertinent info. IMO patents are only good for multi-million dollar corporations. It's very expensive to defend a patent and once it's patented all the big boys become aware of it and will use it with mods. Then you have to face serious expense to defend it and you are required to defend it. I know it's a rough decision to make. If you are sure you can make money up front with investors and a patent go for it but so many have tried before and it's nearly always a losing deal for the inventor especially on any free energy related device. Best of luck however you go about it.
.
Just another tidbit:
"US Patent Office Holds Secret Approximately 4000 Patents
Tom Valone is a former Patent Examiner who was fired about six years ago for producing a conference in Washington DC on these new energy technologies. Valone recently won a lawsuit against the US Patent Office and was awarded reinstatement and six years of back pay. In a 2001 email to Gary Vesperman, Valone wrote in part:
"As a former Patent Examiner, I can tell you that the number of "secretized" patents in the vault at the Patent Office (Park 5 Bldg.) is closer to 4000 or more. They never receive a patent number, and the inventor is rarely, if ever, compensated by the government for use of the invention."
The U.S. Patent Office has a nine-member committee that screens patents for national security implications. A hidden purpose of this committee is to also screen energy-related patents which could threaten the power and fossil fuel companies, etc.
Text of Generic Patent Secrecy Order
SECRECY ORDER (Title 35, United States Code (1952), sections 181-188)
NOTICE: To the applicant above named, his heirs, and any and all of his assignees, attorneys and agents, hereinafter designated principals:
You are hereby notified that your application as above identified has been found to contain subject matter, the unauthorized disclosure of which might be detrimental to the national security, and you are ordered in nowise to publish or disclose the invention or any material information with respect thereto, including hitherto unpublished details of the subject matter of said application, in any way to any person not cognizant of the invention prior to the date of the order, including any employee of the principals, but to keep the same secret except by written consent first obtained of the Commissioner of Patents, under the penalties of 35 U.S.C. (1952) 182, 186.
Any other application already filed or hereafter filed which contains any significant part of the subject matter of the above identified application falls within the scope of this order. If such other application does not stand under a security order, it and the common subject matter should be brought to the attention of the Security Group, Licensing and Review, Patent Office.
If, prior to the issuance of the secrecy order, any significant part of the subject matter has been revealed to any person, the principals shall promptly inform such person of the secrecy order and the penalties for improper disclosure. However, if such part of the subject matter was disclosed to any person in a foreign country or foreign national in the U.S., the principals shall not inform such person of the secrecy order, but instead shall promptly furnish to the Commissioner of Patents the following information to the extent not already furnished: date of disclosure; name and address of the disclosee; identification of such part; and any authorization by a U.S. government agency to export such part. If the subject matter is included in any foreign patent application, or patent, this should be identified. The principals shall comply with any related instructions of the Commissioner.
This order should not be construed in any way to mean that the Government has adopted or contemplates adoption of the alleged invention disclosed in this application; nor is it any indication of the value of such invention.
(The punishment for a violation of this secrecy order, should an inventor exploits or even simply discusses his or her invention which is classified by a patent secrecy order, is 20 years in federal prison. The unlucky inventor would then lose everything he had invested in his invention.) "
Here is the Panacea University article I couldn't find a minute ago. Excellent read of what has happened with so many OU inventions and inventors:
http://www.panacea-bocaf.org/howtheywentwrong.htm
Could we keep the patent / legal talk out of this discussion thead?
It is completely moot when you consider the effect this phenomenon will have on our world (both good and bad) if it is proven to exist.
Mav has been generous by openly sharing his knowledge, and we are working on proving or disproving the concept by way of replication, and that is all that is relevant.
Lets keep the focus on research, information sharing.
Lets keep it in one thread.
Does anyone have pictures of a successful replication?
Im Looking forward to seeing how everyone else is comming along :)
Quote from: e2matrix on April 27, 2011, 04:10:47 PM
I think Panacea University has an article (but I couldn't find it at the moment) about how NOT to go about getting an invention out into real world use or how not to have the world get the opportunity to see it and use it. It's a good read. You might also be aware of the US Patent office SAWS program. Document attached and very pertinent info. IMO patents are only good for multi-million dollar corporations. It's very expensive to defend a patent and once it's patented all the big boys become aware of it and will use it with mods. Then you have to face serious expense to defend it and you are required to defend it. I know it's a rough decision to make. If you are sure you can make money up front with investors and a patent go for it but so many have tried before and it's nearly always a losing deal for the inventor especially on any free energy related device. Best of luck however you go about it.
The attached document is very interesting. It explains why so many free energy devices have been stopped in the US. It is really incredible how the government and established powers work together against the interest of the common people.
I looked at the patent definition from wiki, and although I've never seen a private person being sued for tinkering on an patent, apparently a patent disallows anyone from making or using such a device without permission:
"
The exclusive right granted to a patentee in most countries is the right to prevent others from making, using, selling, or distributing the patented invention without permission.[1]
"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patent
I can see there's a lot of responsibility and stake on Mav's shoulder.
/Wayne
Quote from: importfanatik on April 27, 2011, 04:28:11 PM
Could we keep the patent / legal talk out of this discussion thead?
It is completely moot when you consider the effect this phenomenon will have on our world (both good and bad) if it is proven to exist.
Mav has been generous by openly sharing his knowledge, and we are working on proving or disproving the concept by way of replication, and that is all that is relevant.
Lets keep the focus on research, information sharing.
Lets keep it in one thread.
Does anyone have pictures of a successful replication?
Im Looking forward to seeing how everyone else is comming along :)
I guess the only relationship may be that what you are doing may be illegal under a patent. lol
/Wayne
Quote from: importfanatik on April 27, 2011, 04:28:11 PM
Could we keep the patent / legal talk out of this discussion thead?
It is completely moot when you consider the effect this phenomenon will have on our world (both good and bad) if it is proven to exist.
Mav has been generous by openly sharing his knowledge, and we are working on proving or disproving the concept by way of replication, and that is all that is relevant.
Lets keep the focus on research, information sharing.
Lets keep it in one thread.
Does anyone have pictures of a successful replication?
Im Looking forward to seeing how everyone else is comming along :)
Mavendex is helping us with something potentially very important and I'm trying to help him make the best decisions for both himself and the people of this battered planet. Did you read what I posted and the Panacea info? One of my biggest concerns is if the US Patent office (controlled by corporate interests) gets hold of this is they would probably first make sure no one could get any Nanoperm toroids (they might be classified as dangerous or protected under national security) and then NO one would be able to make these. Not for individual use or any one let alone for production. The Matrix is bigger than you think... ;)
Well, kind of, and kind of not. I posit, on record, that the nanoperm is not critical. A high permeability material is. Mumetal, Permalloy, Molypermalloy, and even something they cannot control like raw magnetite sand are all very viable as inner core materials. The critical ratio is permeability of the inner core to the permeability of the outer core, and it seems that it needs to be approx 20:1 or greater ratio. The mass of each core is important too, but not as much as the permeability.
Regarding the magnetite... you can drag a neo magnet through the dirt and come up with some of this in most places in the world, although it is generally found en masse as spoil from gold mining operations. It is simply impossible to control the distribution of something common in the ground like that;)
Cheers,
Twinbeard
Quote from: e2matrix on April 27, 2011, 05:54:17 PM
Mavendex is helping us with something potentially very important and I'm trying to help him make the best decisions for both himself and the people of this battered planet. Did you read what I posted and the Panacea info? One of my biggest concerns is if the US Patent office (controlled by corporate interests) gets hold of this is they would probably first make sure no one could get any Nanoperm toroids (they might be classified as dangerous or protected under national security) and then NO one would be able to make these. Not for individual use or any one let alone for production. The Matrix is bigger than you think... ;)
I read the USTPO SAWS pdf. It seems like there could be some constitution breaking statements there.
There would have to be some state courts willing to change these things, if they got together on it. Supreme Court probably would not even hear it in open proceedings, well knowing what the subject is before hearing. Rigged.
I believe a few states could get a big ball rolling.
But trying to pat. a device that is withing the criteria exposed in the pdf would be suicide.
One thing that is interesting is, they dont want you to further expose the subject, any of it, to anyone new. But it doesnt say that you cant discuss it with previous people of knowledge.
Well that just tells me that everyone will get a visit. Everyone with knowledge. Would not make sense to gag order just the pat applicant(s), but the other lil piggys run free. ;]
One thing in the pdf caught me. Anything that falls under, "BIG NEWS" "ATTENTION GETTER" is also subject.
I can only imagine what never made it through because of that claim alone.
I would push the ideas knowledge out there as fast as possible along your path to pat. Even out to anonymous paths, lots of YT, how ever. Send out flyers to students at tech schools. lol But if you were put under gag order, you could have the underground path already set up to blow it out there, it just cant be you doing the deed.
Crazy stuff.
Mags
Quote from: Magluvin on April 27, 2011, 06:25:20 PM
I read the USTPO SAWS pdf. It seems like there could be some constitution breaking statements there.
There would have to be some state courts willing to change these things, if they got together on it. Supreme Court probably would not even hear it in open proceedings, well knowing what the subject is before hearing. Rigged.
I believe a few states could get a big ball rolling.
But trying to pat. a device that is withing the criteria exposed in the pdf would be suicide.
One thing that is interesting is, they dont want you to further expose the subject, any of it, to anyone new. But it doesnt say that you cant discuss it with previous people of knowledge.
Well that just tells me that everyone will get a visit. Everyone with knowledge. Would not make sense to gag order just the pat applicant(s), but the other lil piggys run free. ;]
One thing in the pdf caught me. Anything that falls under, "BIG NEWS" "ATTENTION GETTER" is also subject.
I can only imagine what never made it through because of that claim alone.
I would push the ideas knowledge out there as fast as possible along your path to pat. Even out to anonymous paths, lots of YT, how ever. Send out flyers to students at tech schools. lol But if you were put under gag order, you could have the underground path already set up to blow it out there, it just cant be you doing the deed.
Crazy stuff.
Mags
BINGO!!!! Dirty deeds done dirt cheep!
Hi Mavendex,
I will give and advice and everybody will make a lot of money, Mavendex, thane and everybody that read this forum.
The first thing is group thinking, If my friend is rich I'm rich, if we work together like a team we can make a better device and make a rapid buck.
The spiritual group think of thane heins, give to him mavendex with a better idea, mavendex and thane will soon discover another people with better ideas to complete the device.
Mavendex and thane need to make a developer kit1 (as is), with everything needed to make the device in home, you buy at lot price at let me say 300 dollars and sell to anyone to 300 + 30 dollars for the kit. If I go to buy the kit piece by piece by mysell this will cost to me 350 dollars and time, is better to me to buy the kit at 330 dollars or 340. you make right know 30 or 40 bucks, you sell hundreds of this kit.
In a month with the contribution of ideas of the people in this forum you make a better kit2, for 250 dollar you sell to 250 + 30 dollars and sell hundreds of kits, the same for kit3, kit4, upto the final release of a complete device.
You make the money right now, from day 0, and everyone like me will make money selling this device to our friends that dont want to read this forum and/or dont want to get the hands dirty with circuits (there is millions of this people).
And if the circuit dont work in the long time, because someone will discover a fatal flaw, you go with the money from day 0 and without remorse.
Group thinking!!
Edit:
Deleted... patent chatter. ;)
Quote from: Mavendex on April 27, 2011, 10:46:47 AM
Hello I will answer as best as I can,
This version with the new shell needs to be recalibrated for wire and what not I did change more than one variable and have to compensate for these changes, be assured for every 1 watt in we get 12 out thus far.
1)the primary I have found, should no longer be tin plated copper and normal magnet wire will work better in this instance of the new shell, optimal sizing of wire is still being experimented with I have wound it counter clockwise and towards myself it does make a difference if you are winding away or towards your self, the toroidal halves
2) I am useing are mild steel or cold rolled steel, feel free to experiment with other metals as this is a cage.
3)yes the halves should insulate from each other other wise the effect is no longer present
4)The direction of the primary is the same as the secondary as far as winding, conventional winding ratios are out the window, how ever much is on the secondary has a ceiling applied and will always be present. currently I have 3.1 ohms of resistance 16 awg wire on the secondary which is yielding a ceiling of 180 volts
5)on this current size and still needs to be calculated and restructured as far as the math goes but as is with current setup 97 turns of the primary will get you to the sweet spot, again winding ratios calculations for conventional transformers are null
6)yes that is how I made it although I do plan to experiment with other frequencies for other projects
7)yes the toaster is my limiter, I will be changing that soon
8)yes to measure your output I would use light bulbs, wear sunglasses and have a meter (be advised if you turn off the secondary before the primary you will get a backspike)
9)impedance matching as far as I know there is no need, again the device is being recalibrated
<snip<
<snip>
Ok, I'm done Gabbing about patents so back to the Gabriel. :) In thinking about the winding directions you give above I believe it would still be possible to make the mistake of winding it the wrong way Unless we know where the toroid is in relation to you and whether you are starting on the right side of it or the left side or even on the closest side (assuming the toroid is laying flat in front of you).
Assume for a minute you have the toroid laying flat directly in front of you. If you start winding COUNTER-CLOCKWISE toward yourself AND you have started on the right side of the toroid you will be winding CLOCKWISE toward yourself by the time you are half way done when you get to the left side. So if you started on the left side winding COUNTER-CLOCKWISE toward yourself you would have a different wind direction than the first instance. Sorry for the CAPS - not yelling but just wanted it to be easier to read. So does this question sound logical? I think we need to know which side to start CCW toward ourself.
Elisha has a good idea. We won't get to a new paradigm if we divide ourselves and there is a unique opportunity to create a new one. The existing one with the patent is well worn and tried, and looks like it has traps and risks even for the inventor. There is synergy and like-minded people in this forum, so no reason not to help each other. I'll be interested to buy and resell any applicable product from Mav; I originally thought I would buy the donut from him since he paid for the original tooling.
There's no reason Mav shouldn't be able to make a living from his activity, so I'm opened to listen to any proposal he may have.
:)
/Wayne
As you look at the shell with your wires sticking out faceing you I start at 12 oclock wrap to the left towards yourself the secondary should also be wound like this.
experiment, this works for me. I would use a smaller gauge wire on the primary windings so far at the sweet spot is 97 not sure yet about smaller wire but it should be about the same since the inductance will go up but then again Im not useing tinned wire anymore because it seems to saturate the outercore too quickly, we will see if there is a difference but in my experience thus far there is a difference between tinned wire and magnet wire, but this will be the tell all for sure.
Mav
Quote from: Aphasiac on April 27, 2011, 07:43:31 PM
Edit:
Deleted... patent chatter. ;)
Well I caught you before you deleted :) I know I said I was done on that too but since you brought this up: "That document is truly disturbing, if not the least bit surprising. I can't help but to question its authenticity, however." I had to wonder myself if I had researched that document when I got it. I think I did but just to validate it I dug a little deeper and you can see right here on the uspto.gov web site reference to it in the first paragraph of this document: www.uspto.gov/web/offices/com/sol/foia/comm/other/08472066.pdf
It's for REAL and yes it's disturbing.
Quote from: Mavendex on April 27, 2011, 07:56:32 PM
As you look at the shell with your wires sticking out faceing you I start at 12 oclock wrap to the left towards yourself the secondary should also be wound like this.
experiment, this works for me. I would use a smaller gauge wire on the primary windings so far at the sweet spot is 97 not sure yet about smaller wire but it should be about the same since the inductance will go up but then again Im not useing tinned wire anymore because it seems to saturate the outercore too quickly, we will see if there is a difference but in my experience thus far there is a difference between tinned wire and magnet wire, but this will be the tell all for sure.
Mav
Thanks Mav and glad your still with us after all the patent fussing. I just wanted you to have the info if you didn't already know all of that. You are a good man.
And thanks twinbeard for easing my concern that the PTB could keep this from us just by way of the Nanoperm cores. This is shaping up to be a potential game changer.
Quote from: e2matrix on April 27, 2011, 08:07:03 PM
here on the uspto.gov web site reference to it in the first paragraph of this document: www.uspto.gov/web/offices/com/sol/foia/comm/other/08472066.pdf
It's for REAL and yes it's disturbing.
@E2: I had a look myself without so much luck. So thanks for digging that up and also, for asking my question about the winding. :)
Quote from: Mavendex on April 27, 2011, 07:56:32 PM
As you look at the shell with your wires sticking out faceing you I start at 12 oclock wrap to the left towards yourself the secondary should also be wound like this.
experiment, this works for me. I would use a smaller gauge wire on the primary windings so far at the sweet spot is 97 not sure yet about smaller wire but it should be about the same since the inductance will go up but then again Im not useing tinned wire anymore because it seems to saturate the outercore too quickly, we will see if there is a difference but in my experience thus far there is a difference between tinned wire and magnet wire, but this will be the tell all for sure.
Mav
Mavendex I still don't understand how the toroid and shell are wound, I have attached two examples:
Clockwise, and Counter Clockwise
please advise
http://www.kitsandparts.com/minikits/toroid-cw.jpg (http://www.kitsandparts.com/minikits/toroid-cw.jpg)
http://www.kitsandparts.com/minikits/toroid-ccw.jpg (http://www.kitsandparts.com/minikits/toroid-ccw.jpg)
Matthew
Quote from: matthewklinko on April 27, 2011, 09:28:43 PM
Mavendex I still don't understand how the toroid and shell are wound, I have attached two examples:
Clockwise, and Counter Clockwise
please advise
http://www.kitsandparts.com/minikits/toroid-cw.jpg (http://www.kitsandparts.com/minikits/toroid-cw.jpg)
http://www.kitsandparts.com/minikits/toroid-ccw.jpg (http://www.kitsandparts.com/minikits/toroid-ccw.jpg)
Matthew
CCW
I am willing to spend a few hundred dollars to help the cause. Working together is the best thing that can be done to further the experimentation and reach a conclusion.
So, assuming you are getting OU with this circuit, how would you go about pumping this back into your wall outlet for a grid-tie setup?
@Mav
Thank you for sharing and assisting everyone. I am going to ask a dumb ass question and is not way questioning your integrity or what you have accomplished.
We had a thread last year or year before where a very decent person in England had an AC device which amplified the input to many times the out put. However when I arranged a retired physicist and electronics engineer to visit and placed a scope they were able to demonstrate he was actually using for power in than out (was deceiving the power meter and Multimeter). It had some value in cheating your power bill..but that was not the intent.
With DC in and out it is less easy to be deceived.
However, my dumb ass question is what methodology and equipment did you use to measure the power in and out.
PS is there any intention to close loop it (I understand you will need to use a buffer ,,,batteries inverters etc)
Thanks you again
Kind Regards
The first embodiment of this device worked as advertised but as I changed variables Im having issues with getting back to that, at a certain point of turns it reverts to a transformer at the sweet spot for every watt you put in you get 12 out, but unfortunately it requires 400 watts to get to that and thats the issue Im trying to combat at this time. the outercore is saturating allowing the secondary to interact with the primary which is bad if you can imagine, Since I can't afford to have a new shell made ive got to work with this I know a couple of tricks to cancel out the magnetic field so I can drive down consumption but thats still being experimented with.
Might be the spacing from Primary to Secondary. Maybe a tight glove is not a good idea. Hopefully smaller wire will work. Didn't you say you already changed the original device and it doesn't work now? Because of cutting the shell? Too bad we could have taken measurements.
Keep up the great work.
Quote from: sergenet on April 27, 2011, 11:00:16 PM
I am willing to spend a few hundred dollars to help the cause. Working together is the best thing that can be done to further the experimentation and reach a conclusion.
I haven't seen anyone else reply to this one, so I'm going to wade in on it...
@Serg... I'm just throwing this idea out there, but maybe you'd like to consider sending that support in Mav's direction, either as money or parts, if he's willing to accept.
It would probably serve the entire group a benefit to have our source replication back up and running.
And thank you.
Aphasiac.
That is fine with me. If Mav needs some parts I'll be happy to pay for them. Mav, please let me know if you need any help.
Aphasiac
The idea of donating to a man like Mavs ,Is wonderful!!
While I am a man of very limited means ,I will gladly send some of my hard earned Mullah to a guy like him,No Strings attached,EVER!
Those of us that don't have the skills,or the equipment to do productive research,have a very big desire to help men like mavs.
Chetkremens@gmail.com
PS
Mavs
Why don't you sell a little something on Ebay?
And post a link [maybe some "kleenex" or something?]
Men such as yourself "MUST " utilize the resources available to you!
Specifically the resources of our community
Our future depends on this
It's a symbiotic relationship.
I can think of several men that should post links right off the bat ,Bruce, Mags, forrest,etc..............
Quote from: ramset on April 29, 2011, 07:47:41 AM
Aphasiac
The idea of donating to a man like Mavs ,Is wonderful!!
...
Mavs
Why don't you sell a little something on Ebay?
I'd recommend either:
a) Purchase a prepaid credit card or "gift card", and then furnish Mav with the card and verification #'s (these can be obtained through virtually any bank or any virtual (online) bank), or;
b) Obtain Mav's shipping address. Order parts and have them shipped to shipping address.
Either of these options should prove more cost effective.
Best,
Aphasiac.
Well,. I gave it a shot,. but had no luck at all.
But it should be noted that I didnt use a nanoperm core, and the scale is smaller, so its not a true replication and can't really validate if Mav's claims are true or false.
Here is what I built:
Toroid Core: Ferrite ( i think)
Outer Shell: mild steel, 4.5" OD, 1.5" ID
Outer shell halves are insulated with electrical tape.
Primary 80 turns clockwise
Secondary 304 turns clockwise
Power: 12V car battery -> 60 watt inverter -> "gabriel" transformer in series with 60watt light bulb.
Secondary shows 12VAC ( i had to remove alot of turns from the primary to get it UP to 12V)
Used 4 diodes (bridge rectifier) to get that to what I expected to be 12V DC.
According to the multimeter it is 5.4V DC (weird,. i must have done something wrong).
Tried to run that to a car headlight but no luck,. maybe because the voltage isnt right,.
Oh well,.. was a fun experiment in any case and I learned a little about electricity.
Edit: I forgot to mention, primary and secondary are both 18ga magnet wire
Quote from: importfanatik on April 29, 2011, 09:58:11 AM
Well,. I gave it a shot,. but had no luck at all . . . Primary 80 turns clockwise
Secondary 304 turns clockwise . . .
Good effort, Importf.
I think Mav noted CCW -- perhaps this is critical?
Also, what did you use for your outer shell... looks like catch-plates for electric stove elements.
Thanks, Aphasiac.
Quote from: Aphasiac on April 29, 2011, 10:25:44 AM
Good effort, Importf.
I think Mav noted CCW -- perhaps this is critical?
Also, what did you use for your outer shell... looks like catch-plates for electric stove elements.
Thanks, Aphasiac.
Thanks, its an exhaust donut, should be similar to what mav used origionally I believe, just smaller scale.
Aphasiac
Yes Those examples will "do the job".
The only reason I said "sell something on Ebay"
Is For the sake of an experimenters privacy [to the general public].
Transactions can maintain some privacy,and thus be utilized more without disclosing personal info.
This still needs some "Tuning" To help prevent things like "ImportFanatics" experience.
Who better to "Tune" than Mavs??
He just needs the Time and Finance?
Chet
@Import
Nice job thanks for sharing!!
can someone please explain exactly what is the purpose of an exhaust do nut. I have never heard of one before .
Quote from: neptune on April 29, 2011, 10:58:48 AM
can someone please explain exactly what is the purpose of an exhaust do nut. I have never heard of one before .
@Neptune: I think you buy these for custum building a car exhaust (ie... you can cut the pipe cross-sectionally to give yourself whatever angle of bend you happen to need for your custom automotive exhaust.
@Import: I'm curious to know how you sliced that donut so perfectly. Did it come already sliced?
I've costed this project out to roughly $700. based on ordering the secondary core from Germany and the custom outer shell from Mav's supplier. That's an awful lot of money. I agree it's best to use common parts to standardize our efforts, but I'm simply going to have to find other alternatives as Import did.
Aphasiac.
Quote from: Aphasiac on April 29, 2011, 11:06:06 AM
@Import: I'm curious to know how you sliced that donut so perfectly. Did it come already sliced?
Metal Hack saw & a vice
It isnt perfect but I think its close enough
The one thing I did find weird was that the secondary voltage was so small..
With 80 turns on the primary @ 120VAC & 0.5amps, and 304 turns on the secondary, I would have expected the secondary voltage to be way higher,. like 450VAC or something.
I started off with alot of windings on the primary (maybe 200 or so) and had 7.4VAC on the secondary.
I had to remove alot from the primary to get the secondary voltage up to 12VAC
Any ideas on why the secondary voltage might be so low?
Quote from: importfanatik on April 29, 2011, 11:20:49 AM
Metal Hack saw & a vice
It isnt perfect but I think its close enough
Good job on the build there and commendable for being one of the few that have jumped in to try a replication. I think more will try but just a matter of money and time to get to it.
A couple comments on your results - A bridge rectifier (depending on specs) can drop the AC voltage quite a bit so no surprise it went from 12 volts AC down to 5.4 volts DC. Also the Nanoperm or similar core here is key. Regular ferrite and iron are not likely to get any good results. Based on what Mav has said it sounds like getting the coil ratio just right may also be an important fine tuning point which will make a big difference.
Quote from: importfanatik on April 29, 2011, 11:44:37 AM
The one thing I did find weird was that the secondary voltage was so small..
With 80 turns on the primary @ 120VAC & 0.5amps, and 304 turns on the secondary, I would have expected the secondary voltage to be way higher,. like 450VAC or something.
I started off with alot of windings on the primary (maybe 200 or so) and had 7.4VAC on the secondary.
I had to remove alot from the primary to get the secondary voltage up to 12VAC
Any ideas on why the secondary voltage might be so low?
For one thing, the transformer action is only related to the voltage across the transformer. I suspect if you measure the actual voltage across the primary, that it is much less than the 120VAC. Most of the voltage drop is across the lamp, which means the inductance is not very high compare to the lamp resistance.
If it didn't work, than it should behave and be explainable like a regular transformer with some flux leakage.
Also the bridge rectifier should drop about 2 diodes worth or 1.4V.
/Wayne
@import
I have been looking at cores and if you used ferrite or other kinds they still vary in U between them. Here is a link for some cheaper cores...look at how even the ferrite one's U are vastly different. So when I get some money I'm going to get me the biggest core with the highest U. Look at all the cores they have by clicking on Products. I know these aren't nanoperm but heck they are cheap and you can use the highest U. Ferrites have the highest at this site. Just some info.
Here is the site
http://www.cwsbytemark.com/index.php?main_page=index&cPath=206_221&sortby=data2&sortorder=a&page=1&sort=field&sortby=data2&sortorder=d
Also will a magnet stick to your shell Import? Just making sure they didn't give you aluminum shell..LOL.
I posted my last comment cause I saw a core of Import in his picture that looks like a nice size; but it might only have a perm of 125 U or 1000 U or something...The site that I posted has some 15,000 U and some large 10,000 U cores that might help. Does anyone know what U the shell has? I know we want a large difference from the shell and the core right? If anyone knows what the U of Iron wire, Steel Shell please let me know. Also what is the U of the core Mav is using? I thought he said he is using M417 but I can't find it's U, anyone?
Quote from: friendenergy on April 29, 2011, 01:47:45 PM
I posted my last comment cause I saw a core of Import in his picture that looks like a nice size; but it might only have a perm of 125 U or 1000 U or something...The site that I posted has some 15,000 U and some large 10,000 U cores that might help. Does anyone know what U the shell has? I know we want a large difference from the shell and the core right? If anyone knows what the U of Iron wire, Steel Shell please let me know. Also what is the U of the core Mav is using? I thought he said he is using M417 but I can't find it's U, anyone?
The M-417 is 18,000.
Some of the ferrites has 15,000 from the website you posted, which is pretty good.
Thanks Wayne, Well for 15 US dollars I think I might go with a 10000 U ferrite core.
Also, I know this is a little off topic but I have seen some others in this thread that are using Iron wire as the outter shell. I was just thinking if you did a insulated bifilar iron winding around core and the secondary; then put the primary on top of it so it would be used as the shell. If I send DC current thru the Bifilar iron wire shell in opposite directions to cancel their fields could that help breakup the coupling from the primary and the secondary. But the iron wire could still be the shell.. I just thought if I send the DC current in with a pot resistor I could maybe tune the shell to only allow so much coupling? Just a thought, will try when I get some friggin money. Peace.
PS. it might be a good Ideal to put in a diode for each of the iron wire so any bemf doesn't fry your DC powersupply. Cheers.
Quote from: friendenergy on April 29, 2011, 01:47:45 PM
I posted my last comment cause I saw a core of Import in his picture that looks like a nice size; but it might only have a perm of 125 U or 1000 U or something...The site that I posted has some 15,000 U and some large 10,000 U cores that might help. Does anyone know what U the shell has? I know we want a large difference from the shell and the core right? If anyone knows what the U of Iron wire, Steel Shell please let me know. Also what is the U of the core Mav is using? I thought he said he is using M417 but I can't find it's U, anyone?
I dug all over that site ( http://www.cwsbytemark.com/index.php?main_page=index&cPath=206_221&sortby=data2&sortorder=a&page=1&sort=field&sortby=data2&sortorder=d )
and could not find any cores of any size more than around 200 u. Is this the site you are referring to? Could you post a link of any of the 10000 or 15000 u cores? Thanks !
I have another question, how does saturation effect this process? Or how do you think it does. I see alot about Permeability but not about saturation. I was looking up
Permeability of Iron, http://info.ee.surrey.ac.uk/Workshop/advice/coils/mu/#class
about mid way down.
And steel, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permeability_%28electromagnetism%29
I can see kind of how it works but then I see this about Saturation of Iron compared to Ferrite, Iron being 1.6 T and Ferrite being 200mt to 500 mT.
http://info.ee.surrey.ac.uk/Workshop/advice/coils/mu/#sat
Can anyone clear this up as how it would apply to the Gabriel Device?
Sorry guys, should have put all this in one post..I'm just throwing ideas out while we wait for the big dogs to tweak the original. So, this is just for those that were thinking of using ferrites or better cores and iron or steel wire...it seems we need to have a large difference in permability for this effect to take..so if we can use the 10000 U ferrite core and nickel wire that has from 100 U to 600 U that might be enough difference. Iron and Steel wire can have up to 3000 U perm so I thought maybe Nickel would be good. Ok, I'm done brain storming with bifilar nickel wire with cancelling DC field applied to control AC coupling from the primary to the secondary...lol@me.
I also have a question...
If I remember correctly, high permeability is of such importance that Mav ordered a custom outer shell to ensure tight fit, but then had troubles fitting/winding the secondary inside of the 'fitted' primary shell.
What about using the loose fitted exhaust donut as he did in his original build, then weld shut the outer shell except leaving a small gap to to fill the core with non-conductive magnetic coil powder (like this here: http://cgi.ebay.ca/MAGNETITE-500g-Magnetic-non-conductive-COIL-CORE-POWDER-/260773524077?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_3&hash=item3cb750326d ), and then seal it up.
Wiki says the powder can increase permeability by >1000x. (see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_core )
Thoughts?
Aphasiac.
If I had ferrite powder I would make core such way :
fill PVC tube with powder or ferro-fluid and insulate ends. The secondary , shield then make toroid from it and end by winding primary.
Quote from: friendenergy on April 29, 2011, 05:06:22 PM
I have another question, how does saturation effect this process? Or how do you think it does. I see alot about Permeability but not about saturation. I was looking up
Permeability of Iron, http://info.ee.surrey.ac.uk/Workshop/advice/coils/mu/#class
about mid way down.
And steel, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permeability_%28electromagnetism%29
I can see kind of how it works but then I see this about Saturation of Iron compared to Ferrite, Iron being 1.6 T and Ferrite being 200mt to 500 mT.
http://info.ee.surrey.ac.uk/Workshop/advice/coils/mu/#sat
Can anyone clear this up as how it would apply to the Gabriel Device?
There was some comments before. The belief is that some flux has to get through the outer core to the secondary for voltage to be induced. This is facilitated when the outer core is partly saturated... that's why the number of turns on the primary is important as it affects the inductance (idle current) and saturation level of the outer core. This area requires experimentation to verify the behavior and tune the device is the present understanding. That's the stage Mav is at.
/Wayne
thanks wayne, so outer shell needs to be saturated so coupling to secondary can take place. Low permeability and low saturation for outer shell, high permeability for inner core,....high saturation or low saturation for core? I know ferrite is only 200 to 500 mT compared to iron of 1.6 T...hmmmm would you happen to know the saturation for the M-417..:) thanks. Hope I have that right, if not let me know please.
Was hoping to hear from Mav about helping him out. Chet, maybe you and I (and others if they like to join) can set up a fund which can be used to help out where it is needed the most. What do you think?
Serge
Quote from: Aphasiac on April 29, 2011, 06:13:46 PM
I also have a question...
If I remember correctly, high permeability is of such importance that Mav ordered a custom outer shell to ensure tight fit, but then had troubles fitting/winding the secondary inside of the 'fitted' primary shell.
What about using the loose fitted exhaust donut as he did in his original build, then weld shut the outer shell except leaving a small gap to to fill the core with non-conductive magnetic coil powder (like this here: http://cgi.ebay.ca/MAGNETITE-500g-Magnetic-non-conductive-COIL-CORE-POWDER-/260773524077?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_3&hash=item3cb750326d ), and then seal it up.
Wiki says the powder can increase permeability by >1000x. (see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_core )
Thoughts?
Aphasiac.
I believe Mav found that the top and bottom halves need to be insulated from each other or it doesn't work as the original.
I dont currently have a lot to spare but id be willing to chip in a few bucks to help the cause. let me know
Serge
I think figuring out how to finance our selfless researchers is imperative!
While I am presently cash poor.It would definitely make my day to be able to help some of these men on a regular basis.
I know that there are reservations amongst some about maintaining anonymity
I have absolutely no problem with this!
Perhaps you can start another thread Serge to bounce around ideas?
this has always been an issue with our community,Case in point "mavs" being strapped for cash ,hindering his efforts.
Not quite sure how, but we need to be able to focus our resources where they will do the most good.
Thanks
Chet
Quote from: friendenergy on April 29, 2011, 08:54:56 PM
thanks wayne, so outer shell needs to be saturated so coupling to secondary can take place. Low permeability and low saturation for outer shell, high permeability for inner core,....high saturation or low saturation for core? I know ferrite is only 200 to 500 mT compared to iron of 1.6 T...hmmmm would you happen to know the saturation for the M-417..:) thanks. Hope I have that right, if not let me know please.
The inner core is not meant to operate in a saturated mode since it's purpose is to capture as much of the secondary coil flux as possible so that it is not reflected back to the primary, thus minimizing the BEMF. This is what gives the OU.
Magnetec info indicates 1.2T for saturation.
:) Hello everyone look at this... (I've bought about 2 years ago a M-16 core)...
Europe website address--> http://www.magnetec.de (http://www.magnetec.de)
M 417: Shop page --> http://www.magnetec.de/shop/show.php?main_kat=&kategorie=7&start=10&nr= (http://www.magnetec.de/shop/show.php?main_kat=&kategorie=7&start=10&nr=)
M 417 info: Type "Nanoperm", "Universal Core", OD --> 200mm, ID --> 175mm, H --> 30mm, lfe (magnetic path length) --> 58.8 cm, afe (effective magnetic surface) --> 2.78 cm^2, µ (Permeability) --> 18000, AL generaly for 100 turns... (for inductance calculation) 7.4 - 14.7 uH.
Hope it helps...
So heres a update on my progress.
I took apart the whole thing and inspected my wire, I unwound most of it and found that one of my leads was laying on top of about 30 turns, and compressed on top of them .... I gotta drink more coffee when I do these things..
This resulted in a 2 ohm load in the secondary that shouldn't be there cause when I took off half of my wire it still read 3.1 ohms on the secondary quite confusing non the less.
So far with the testing I have done
Turns ratio of primary vs secondary are not affected.
We can still only charge it in one direction if you go inside to outside it doesn't work at all no voltage potential. Which makes it a magnetic switch if anything.
Ill have it rewound for monday hopefully we can get something going if I dont screw up again. I hate setbacks.
With the turn ratio thing some people are saying this is showing rock solid decoupling so mabye we don't need 120 volts to run it only amps
Im going to try to throw it on my poweramp and see what happens.
Quote from: Mavendex on May 01, 2011, 11:23:18 AM
We can still only charge it in one direction if you go inside to outside it doesn't work at all no voltage potential.
Just to clarify, you are saying you have to wind counterclockwise, right?
What voltage did you get on your secondary when wound clockwise?
Could that be why I had such small voltage on my secondary?
It wont cost me anything at this point to rewind it so maybe ill give it a try just for fun.
Is there anyone else out there trying to replicate?
Im really curious to know how/if others are doing
Quote from: importfanatik on May 01, 2011, 12:14:34 PM
Just to clarify, you are saying you have to wind counterclockwise, right?
What voltage did you get on your secondary when wound clockwise?
Could that be why I had such small voltage on my secondary?
It wont cost me anything at this point to rewind it so maybe ill give it a try just for fun.
Is there anyone else out there trying to replicate?
Im really curious to know how/if others are doing
If I understand your question right that was covered in post #303 and #304. I had asked about winding direction a couple posts back from that too. It's Counter clockwise. Not replicating here yet but I'd like too when I can afford one of the cores. I know wayne and casman have been working on replication and a number of others too.
Quote from: Mavendex on May 01, 2011, 11:23:18 AM
So heres a update on my progress.
I took apart the whole thing and inspected my wire, I unwound most of it and found that one of my leads was laying on top of about 30 turns, and compressed on top of them .... I gotta drink more coffee when I do these things..
This resulted in a 2 ohm load in the secondary that shouldn't be there cause when I took off half of my wire it still read 3.1 ohms on the secondary quite confusing non the less.
So far with the testing I have done
Turns ratio of primary vs secondary are not affected.
We can still only charge it in one direction if you go inside to outside it doesn't work at all no voltage potential. Which makes it a magnetic switch if anything.
Ill have it rewound for monday hopefully we can get something going if I dont screw up again. I hate setbacks.
With the turn ratio thing some people are saying this is showing rock solid decoupling so mabye we don't need 120 volts to run it only amps
Im going to try to throw it on my poweramp and see what happens.
That's quite impressive that there is no voltage at all going from the secondary to the primary. That seems very important and a validation of why this is working when going from the primary to secondary.
I hope you are all on the same hemisphere. :D Read Steven Mark notes. Thank you.
So does this mean that all we have to worry about is getting the primary field in?
Maybe when winding the primary, for each turn make wider spacing. This way you can go around the outer shell many times. You can make taps on the primary to make fast adjustments and still be covering the whole shell with powered primary wire.
Naturally it should be wound with more wire than prescribed just to test those boundaries while your at it. Then when you find the sweet spot, cut off the tail.
Hey Mav
I like the idea to us an audio amp to try driving frequencies, with adjust abilities. You can use pc or laptop for a signal gen to the amp, and try different wave forms.
I have an old Soundstream D100 and a Class A 100 Im setting up for this kind of testing.
Hey Forest
Any particular notes we should pay particular attn to? ;]
Mags
Quote from: e2matrix on May 01, 2011, 01:20:31 PM
If I understand your question right that was covered in post #303 and #304. I had asked about winding direction a couple posts back from that too. It's Counter clockwise. Not replicating here yet but I'd like too when I can afford one of the cores. I know wayne and casman have been working on replication and a number of others too.
Sorry, i totally misunderstood what he said about from inside to outside. I get it now.
I just tried using the inside coil as the primary and got 1.9VAC on the outside coil.
120VAC input on Outside coil = 12VAC output on Inside coil
120VAC input on Inside coil = 1.9VAC output on Outside coil
Where inside is 304 turns CW, and outside is 80 turns CW
Quote from: Magluvin on May 01, 2011, 03:00:11 PM
So does this mean that all we have to worry about is getting the primary field in?
Maybe when winding the primary, for each turn make wider spacing. This way you can go around the outer shell many times. You can make taps on the primary to make fast adjustments and still be covering the whole shell with powered primary wire.
Naturally it should be wound with more wire than prescribed just to test those boundaries while your at it. Then when you find the sweet spot, cut off the tail.
Hey Mav
I like the idea to us an audio amp to try driving frequencies, with adjust abilities. You can use pc or laptop for a signal gen to the amp, and try different wave forms.
I have an old Soundstream D100 and a Class A 100 Im setting up for this kind of testing.
Hey Forest
Any particular notes we should pay particular attn to? ;]
Mags
Mags
Steven Mark device worked only in one position but when turned down side ceased to generate excess in output. He said that on Souther hemisphere his device worked "opposite". I think you see the correlations.
Quote from: forest on May 01, 2011, 03:32:20 PM
Mags
Steven Mark device worked only in one position but when turned down side ceased to generate excess in output. He said that on Souther hemisphere his device worked "opposite". I think you see the correlations.
That was only on one of his early devices. Later he figured out something that fixed that so they worked either rights side up or upside down.
Quote from: Magluvin on May 01, 2011, 03:00:11 PM
So does this mean that all we have to worry about is getting the primary field in?
Maybe when winding the primary, for each turn make wider spacing. This way you can go around the outer shell many times. You can make taps on the primary to make fast adjustments and still be covering the whole shell with powered primary wire.
Naturally it should be wound with more wire than prescribed just to test those boundaries while your at it. Then when you find the sweet spot, cut off the tail.
Hey Mav
I like the idea to us an audio amp to try driving frequencies, with adjust abilities. You can use pc or laptop for a signal gen to the amp, and try different wave forms.
I have an old Soundstream D100 and a Class A 100 Im setting up for this kind of testing.
Hey Forest
Any particular notes we should pay particular attn to? ;]
Mags
Hey Mags,
I was also thinking that after I get this secondary rewound if the unifilar doesn't work and we are still saturating badly
I was going to use the pc signal gen, into the power amp with 2 channels hook up the coil bifilar and run 60hz thru but try and use a canceling method with phasing just a little and turn my amp turns in to 1/2 amp turns or 1/4amp turns this way we can drive down consumption as well.
while we cut the tail off kick it square in the #^%%$
Mav
Quote from: e2matrix on May 01, 2011, 04:43:49 PM
That was only on one of his early devices. Later he figured out something that fixed that so they worked either rights side up or upside down.
so ? what do you think it could be ?
Quote from: importfanatik on May 01, 2011, 03:06:05 PM
I just tried using the inside coil as the primary and got 1.9VAC on the outside coil.
120VAC input on Outside coil = 12VAC output on Inside coil
120VAC input on Inside coil = 1.9VAC output on Outside coil
Where inside is 304 turns CW, and outside is 80 turns CW
hi all
importfanatik's results** certainly show an asymmetric coupling operation between outer and inner windings
BUT...
i) the asymmetric coupling effect appears to work better when using the inner winding as the primary
(only 2.63% voltage coupling outer to inner;
6.02% voltage coupling inner to outer)
ii) the efficiency of the transformer appears to be so low that the overall loss greatly exceeds any advantage of the asymmetric coupling! :(
(** at this drive level, at least)
===========
CALCULATIONS:-
I/P: 120VAC (Outer as primary)
O/P: 12VAC (Inner as secondary)
turns ratio 80:304 = 1:3.8
120 * 3.8 = 456VAC
(theoretic o/p due to turns ratio alone)
actual o/p coupling = 12/456 = 2.63% of theoretic
------------------------
I/P: 120VAC (Inner as primary)
O/P: 1.9VAC (Outer as secondary)
turns ratio 304:80 = 1:0.263
120 * 0.263 = 31.56VAC
(theoretic o/p due to turns ratio alone)
actual o/p coupling = 1.9/31.56 = 6.02% of theoretic
============
np
http://docsfreelunch.blogspot.com (http://docsfreelunch.blogspot.com)
Thanks nul-points.
I wonder though,..
Im guessing that when people talk about transformer winding ratios, it is usually based on both primary and secondary being wound around the same core, and so the same circumference, apples-to-apples.
Maybe the reason the voltages are so far from what is expected is because of the difference in circumference between the primary and secondary coil windings.
I think your right about my transformer being very inefficient...
But I dont think we can safely say the inner works better as a primary without a formula that takes the difference in circumference into account along with the # of turns.
Just thinking out loud...
Quote from: importfanatik on May 01, 2011, 08:29:28 PM
[...]
Im guessing that when people talk about transformer winding ratios, it is usually based on both primary and secondary being wound around the same core, and so the same circumference, apples-to-apples.
Maybe the reason the voltages are so far from what is expected is because of the difference in circumference between the primary and secondary coil windings.
I think your right about my transformer being very inefficient...
But I dont think we can safely say the inner works better as a primary without a formula that takes the difference in circumference into account along with the # of turns.
[...]
hi all - and thanks for the reply, importfanatik
i should say that my previous post was not intended to comment on any personal aspect of a particular build
it's great that you were able to share with us all some early feedback on real voltage data from a replication of this type of device
my post was just intended to get some initial idea of the (off-load?) voltage coupling behaviour of such a device
the asymmetric behaviour of the voltage coupling (inner-to-outer & outer-to-inner) is encouraging
if this type of device is intended to provide useful transformer-type action of
at least regular efficiency, however, then it would seem that the (off-load?) voltage readings for a 1:4 turns ratio should give an output voltage which is much higher than 6% of theoretical in at least
one direction
the fact that these initial values seem so far from regular transformer behaviour suggests that it is not going to be straightforward for replicators to achieve the sort of efficiencies promised by the early discussions here in this thread
no formula will be necessary
if further data from actual builds show that we're not seeing true 'transformer' type action in
either direction when the devices can eventually be measured on-load
i'm hoping that my comments will be seen by all as intended - constructive whilst hopefully also realistic
all the best with the on-going experiments
np
http://docsfreelunch.blogspot.com (http://docsfreelunch.blogspot.com)
Quote from: forest on May 01, 2011, 05:10:34 PM
so ? what do you think it could be ?
I don't have that info right off hand but if it is known you'd probably be able to get an answer from Bruce_TPU on his message thread ( http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=2300.1110 ).
Transformer and why the voltages aren't coupling correctly. From Wiki site
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transformer
The ideal transformer model assumes that all flux generated by the primary winding links all the turns of every winding, including itself. In practice, some flux traverses paths that take it outside the windings.[34] Such flux is termed leakage flux, and results in leakage inductance in series with the mutually coupled transformer windings.[33] Leakage results in energy being alternately stored in and discharged from the magnetic fields with each cycle of the power supply. It is not directly a power loss (see "Stray losses" below), but results in inferior voltage regulation, causing the secondary voltage to fail to be directly proportional to the primary, particularly under heavy load.[34] Transformers are therefore normally designed to have very low leakage inductance.
Quote from: Mavendex on May 01, 2011, 04:54:10 PM
Hey Mags,
I was also thinking that after I get this secondary rewound if the unifilar doesn't work and we are still saturating badly
I was going to use the pc signal gen, into the power amp with 2 channels hook up the coil bifilar and run 60hz thru but try and use a canceling method with phasing just a little and turn my amp turns in to 1/2 amp turns or 1/4amp turns this way we can drive down consumption as well.
while we cut the tail off kick it square in the #^%%$
Mav
Hi Mav,
I think it's a good thing you try the signal generator through the amp to power it. This way you can avoid overpowering and saturating the shell, and even get rid of the toaster. All you need to do is start at a high freq where less power will be allowed into the primary because of increased coil impedance (maybe 1k or so) and tune your way down while monitoring input and output of the device. Of course you can also play with the amp output to adjust things. You may hit a point of best performance of the device.
regards,
Mario
Quote from: nul-points on May 02, 2011, 01:03:30 AM
i'm hoping that my comments will be seen by all as intended - constructive whilst
I totally read it that way. I hope I didnt come off as defensive, I didnt mean to.
Thanks again
Hi all.
I've been following this with great interest. Unfortunately, I've not much experience with electrical device design and construction. I would build one with fairly good plans, but absent that I'll just observe until I can get something I know I can do (and won't kill myself trying!).
I think it's worthwhile to try to keep a summary of "what works" as people go along in this. So, towards that end, I've put together an MS Word doc that hopefully summarizes what we DO know. Yes, there is lot of info we still need here, but the missing info will be filled in as we go.
I do want to emphasize that this is "open source", so if anyone wants to add to the document or correct any errors, please do so and repost the revised document here. Also, please keep it in ".doc" format, so nearly everyone should be able to have no problems in opening it.
Thanks!
-- Robert
Thanks for starting a summary document although I think PDF format would be more universal for everyone. I know that even if you don't have MS Word you can get an open source program to open .doc files but not everyone may want that whole suite you generally have to install. I found a PDF viewer with a built in typewriter tool and in every way the PDF viewer is better than Adobe or Foxit PDF by far IMO. So it's easy to edit with this too. It's PDF-XChange viewer and it is totally FREE. Google it or grab it here or any number of places: http://download.cnet.com/PDF-XChange-Viewer/3000-10743_4-10598377.html Stuff from CNET is guaranteed virus and trojan free.
Attached is my conversion of the .doc file (135 Kbytes vs. 419 Kbytes for the .doc file - another reason I prefer PDF's)
So the power amp kicks butt!!!
I rewound it all day and tried the opposite of stepping up the voltage and wound it to step it down, got consumption down to around 2.60 amps @ 120 volts with a 48 volt output on the secondary and 1.3 amp drawn, when I did this the amperage on the primary dropped to a total of 1.66 amps total wattage 199.2 watts... with 4 lights being lit each light drawing in 48 volts and .3 amps total wattage of 230.4 so getting better! with a difference of 31.2 watts for free :D power factor of .8
So then I threw it on the poweramp, interesting results, even tho its wound for a step down in voltage every 1 volt I put in on the primary I got 1.7 on the secondary! Its not quite overunity yet on the power amp but Im confident this next rewind will get us to it. I feel much better not playing with deadly electricity! Now I can't measure the powerfactor on the poweramp but I assume everything is returned to the source so if thats the case the poweramp gave us 12 watts for free.
Mav
Quote from: Mavendex on May 02, 2011, 09:07:54 PM
So the power amp kicks butt!!!
I rewound it all day and tried the opposite of stepping up the voltage and wound it to step it down, got consumption down to around 2.60 amps @ 120 volts with a 48 volt output on the secondary and 1.3 amp drawn, when I did this the amperage on the primary dropped to a total of 1.66 amps total wattage 199.2 watts... with 4 lights being lit each light drawing in 48 volts and .3 amps total wattage of 230.4 so getting better! with a difference of 31.2 watts for free :D power factor of .8
So then I threw it on the poweramp, interesting results, even tho its wound for a step down in voltage every 1 volt I put in on the primary I got 1.7 on the secondary! Its not quite overunity yet on the power amp but Im confident this next rewind will get us to it. I feel much better not playing with deadly electricity! Now I can't measure the powerfactor on the poweramp but I assume everything is returned to the source so if thats the case the poweramp gave us 12 watts for free.
Mav
Glad you got some more tests in Mav. I'm probably confused on the numbers you just posted so I'm asking for clarification on the output numbers. You said 4 lights at 48 volts each drawing 0.3 amps? Which when I run Ohms law gets 14.4 watts per bulb times 4 for a total of 57.6 watts being drawn. I am seeing that if I multiply that 57.6 times 4 again then I see 230.6 so is there a math error somewhere in your calcs or am I misunderstanding something?
hrmmm... The power amp works.. winding for step up.
Hey Mav
What amp are you using?
Im working on some multi core stuff. Im getting my amps out of storage tomorrow. I dont know why I hadnt thought of it long ago. Instead I was driving some hard hittin woofers, now Ill be drivin some flux multiplying inductors. ;]
If you dont mind, what ohm is your primary?
Good stuff mav
Mags
Hey Mags,
Its a Peavy CS-1000 power amplifier, 2 channels 2ohm min load, 39 volts stereo or 49 volts bridged
My primary got to 1.7 this time around.. insulated wire to try and keep the shell from saturating.
1.0 on the secondary the ceiling was still there. but it was 48 volts this time can never get above it... when its wound its wound. at least thus far
Mav
oh btw mags, Ive never had any luck with the russian doll setup as of yet let me know what you come up with
Quote from: e2matrix on May 02, 2011, 06:58:21 PM
Attached is my conversion of the .doc file (135 Kbytes vs. 419 Kbytes for the .doc file - another reason I prefer PDF's)
@ TAO: Great work, and thank you!
I have a question on the following excerpt from your doc:
"Primary (outer) toroid:
LOW (but not zero) permeability metal; mild steel or cold rolled steel work well, also
automobile exhaust donuts (which are readily available from muffler shops) work well
for this the upper and lower halves of the shell are NOT electrically connected,
but they are
mechanically connected; there may be a gap between them for cooling purposes wire should be wrapped counter-clockwise (see diagram); normal magnet wire so far has been shown to be best
______________
Is this correct? My current understanding is there should be no gaps, else you end up with a transformer. Should the outer shell not be welded or epoxied completely shut? Mav?
Thanks, Aphasiac.
Im not gapped at the moment just electrically isolated, I guess it would all depend on how thick your shell is or how far away your wire is at least from my experience.
Hey Mav
Very cool. Its funny though, I think Im dealing with the same problems as the shell game. ;]
I find it interesting that adding a core to the secondary, that the sec can be shorted and no extra draw from the primary.
So Im hoping the amp and testing will help me also. ;]
Would be interesting if both styles end up good.
Im going with 2.2ohm 30awg windings for amp purposes.
Mags
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rhIc_Oi9Oqc
enjoy for our very own flux capacitor :D
When this hits 88 mph your gonna see some serious $hit
Hey Mav,
If i have read correctly you are actually starting to get it back up and running correct? atleast with more output than input?
Is there any way you could take some pics or make a video of your setup so that the rest of us may see? Im more of a visual learner and have somewhat of a hard time imagining it.
Thanks In Advance and Good Work!
Quote from: Mavendex on May 02, 2011, 09:07:54 PM
So the power amp kicks butt!!!
I rewound it all day and tried the opposite of stepping up the voltage and wound it to step it down, got consumption down to around 2.60 amps @ 120 volts with a 48 volt output on the secondary and 1.3 amp drawn, when I did this the amperage on the primary dropped to a total of 1.66 amps total wattage 199.2 watts... with 4 lights being lit each light drawing in 48 volts and .3 amps total wattage of 230.4 so getting better! with a difference of 31.2 watts for free :D power factor of .8
<snip<
Mav
Ok sorry I don't want to nag here but can Mavendex or someone tell me if I'm missing something in the above calcs? Amps x Volts = Power in Watts. "Four lights each drawing 48 volts and 0.3 Amps = 14.4 watts draw per bulb x 4 bulbs = 57.6 watts total draw (output it appears) for 199.2 watts input = 28.9 % efficient = NOT even close to OU. Sorry to have to ask again as I'm hoping I missed something or misunderstood something but if not then we are a long ways from 88 MPH and getting back to the future ;)
Quote from: e2matrix on May 03, 2011, 10:07:45 PM
Ok sorry I don't want to nag here but can Mavendex or someone tell me if I'm missing something in the above calcs? . . . Sorry to have to ask again as I'm hoping I missed something or misunderstood something but if not then we are a long ways from 88 MPH and getting back to the future ;)
Hey Mav, do you have an update for us on your winding and its performance? Are you having any luck finding that 'sweet spot' again?
Cheers,
Aphasiac.
Hi all. I am a newbie in the posting. Have been folowing the thread for a while and gathering materials to do my own build.. It occured to me that this works but it is built backwards. He built it that way only because of the materials he had at hand. Combining Thane's flux following the path of lower resistance logic and having a larger path to follow it to give the difference in reluctance, having the primary as the central core and using the same materials ( such as metglass) in progressive layers outward with the next wind automatically due to the increase of the toroid size as it expands gives a path of less reluctance due to increase in size. Feedback anyone?
Quote from: doctown4u on May 05, 2011, 12:01:46 AM
[...]
It occured to me that this works but it is built backwards.
[...]
having the primary as the central core and using the same materials ( such as metglass) in progressive layers outward with the next wind automatically due to the increase of the toroid size as it expands gives a path of less reluctance due to increase in size. Feedback anyone?
hi doc
we haven't seen any evidence yet that this works :(
the only hard data so far does support asymmetric coupling - and that seems to favour the 'backward' direction:
Quote from: nul-points on May 01, 2011, 07:14:12 PM
[snip from reply #352]
importfanatik's results** certainly show an asymmetric coupling operation between outer and inner windings
BUT...
i) the asymmetric coupling effect appears to work better when using the inner winding as the primary
(only 2.63% voltage coupling outer to inner;
6.02% voltage coupling inner to outer)
ii) the efficiency of the transformer appears to be so low that the overall loss greatly exceeds any advantage of the asymmetric coupling! :(
(** at this drive level, at least)
see reply #347 for data from rep build (user 'importfanatik')
hope this helps
np
http://docsfreelunch.blogspot.com (http://docsfreelunch.blogspot.com)
I'm also new to the OU forum, but have enjoyed posts here for some time. Feynman started this thread and I have a lot of respect for him, and Mavendex and e2matrix and many others here. (Are you out there, feynman ?-- hope your replication is going well.)
I have a question about which toroid to use for the inner toroid. PESN says,
"His idea is simple, but fundamentally changes the design of Thane Heins system. He takes a large M-146 nanoperm toroid produced by Magnetec ..."
But when I went to Magnetec's website yesterday, could not find the M-146 toroid... do they still sell this one ??
OR -- Is there an equivalent toroid one can use? I'm in the States and hope there is a source on this side of the pond. I'm thinking also about trying a replication and appreciate the "open source" nature of this discussion -- I agree with Feynman and others about the importance of open sourcing this research, which I think is very important for humanity.
We need a new, clean energy source!!! Thanks to all contributing to this development. I hope I can contribute something. (I have a decent oscilloscope... haven't seen any DSO waveforms posted yet for this device.)
This thread is excellent!
What I really want is a practical application for this device, that can be used now.
For example, this scooter uses three 12 volt lead acid batteries:
http://www.superscootersales.com/?page_id=3&category=16&product_id=10
How can the Gabriel Device be used to extend the range of this scooter?
Also, what are your views on using Lithium batteries? Could using Lithium batteries be dangerous?
Please keep this thread alive !!!
Quote from: JouleSeeker on May 05, 2011, 01:42:30 AM
I'm also new to the OU forum, but have enjoyed posts here for some time. Feynman started this thread and I have a lot of respect for him, and Mavendex and e2matrix and many others here. (Are you out there, feynman ?-- hope your replication is going well.)
I have a question about which toroid to use for the inner toroid. PESN says,
"His idea is simple, but fundamentally changes the design of Thane Heins system. He takes a large M-146 nanoperm toroid produced by Magnetec ..."
But when I went to Magnetec's website yesterday, could not find the M-146 toroid... do they still sell this one ??
OR -- Is there an equivalent toroid one can use? I'm in the States and hope there is a source on this side of the pond. I'm thinking also about trying a replication and appreciate the "open source" nature of this discussion -- I agree with Feynman and others about the importance of open sourcing this research, which I think is very important for humanity.
We need a new, clean energy source!!! Thanks to all contributing to this development. I hope I can contribute something. (I have a decent oscilloscope... haven't seen any DSO waveforms posted yet for this device.)
Actually you've inverted a number as it was originally stated (although incorrectly) that it was an M-416 but was later pointed out by Mavendex that this was a mistake and it should have been the M-417. While no one has identified an exact replacement in the U.S. I'm sure there are some that might work but you may need to get a different size shell. Also as twinbeard has mentioned it is likely you can make your own with magnetite if you are creative enough.
Quote from: FreqShift on May 05, 2011, 09:45:08 AM
This thread is excellent!
What I really want is a practical application for this device, that can be used now.
For example, this scooter uses three 12 volt lead acid batteries:
http://www.superscootersales.com/?page_id=3&category=16&product_id=10
How can the Gabriel Device be used to extend the range of this scooter?
Also, what are your views on using Lithium batteries? Could using Lithium batteries be dangerous?
Please keep this thread alive !!!
Lithium batteries are very prone to explode into flames if they are not charged in a very controlled way while you can hit lead acid batteries with almost anything and they seem to like it.
Quote from: e2matrix on May 05, 2011, 12:45:43 PM
Actually you've inverted a number as it was originally stated (although incorrectly) that it was an M-416 but was later pointed out by Mavendex that this was a mistake and it should have been the M-417. While no one has identified an exact replacement in the U.S. I'm sure there are some that might work but you may need to get a different size shell. Also as twinbeard has mentioned it is likely you can make your own with magnetite if you are creative enough.
Thanks much, e2Matrix! That's helpful.
Now a physics question that I think may be relevant to the Gabriel device. The high-permeability toroidal core will tend to "contain" the magnetic (B) field inside the core.
Here's my thought experiment, which would be fun to do as a real experiment. Consider a coil of wire (with a tiny light-bulb load), air core, and push and pull a magnet into and out of this coil -- clearly, a current will be generated and the light will glow. Faraday (I understand) visualized B lines of force moving the electrons in the wire.
Now, place a high-permeability hollow cylinder into the coil and then do the same thing. Let's assume that the cylinder is long enough and high-perm enough that the wire-coil sees very little B field lines. (Close to zero.) Also, stipulate that this high-perm tube has very high resistance (ohms) also so as to have essentially no Eddy currents.
The question -- will there still be an electrical current generated in the coil?
Quote from: e2matrix on May 05, 2011, 12:50:58 PM
Lithium batteries are very prone to explode into flames if they are not charged in a very controlled way while you can hit lead acid batteries with almost anything and they seem to like it.
Ok. Thank you.
I can live with lead acid batteries.. for now.
So how can we attach an 800 watt DC motor as the load in this circuit?
Quote from: FreqShift on May 06, 2011, 02:01:01 AM
Ok. Thank you.
I can live with lead acid batteries.. for now.
So how can we attach an 800 watt DC motor as the load in this circuit?
We've got a long ways to go before we're there, Freqshift.
We're still trying to obtain materials, to build something that's functional and useful, to standardize our results and to replicate reliably. You're welcome to join in, as part of that pursuit, if you like.
Quote from: e2matrix on May 05, 2011, 12:45:43 PM
Actually you've inverted a number as it was originally stated (although incorrectly) that it was an M-416 but was later pointed out by Mavendex that this was a mistake and it should have been the M-417. While no one has identified an exact replacement in the U.S. I'm sure there are some that might work but you may need to get a different size shell. Also as twinbeard has mentioned it is likely you can make your own with magnetite if you are creative enough.
OK -- thanks, e2matrix -- Magnetec indeed has the M-417. Here are some specs:
QuoteProduct: M-417
Description:
M-417 (81693)Toroidal core NANOPERM
200 x 175 x 30 mm
Price per Unit: 180,00 EUR
URL = http://www.magnetec.de/shop/details.php?id=119&kategorie=7&main_kat=&start=10&nr=
That cost, 180 Euros, is (today) $261, which is fairly expensive... Plus the time & cost to ship from Europe. Is there an alternative? Or at least, does anyone know how long it takes to ship to the States?(PS -- I'm putting my "thought experiment" above on hold until I can actually do an experiment to find out the answer...)
Quote from: JouleSeeker on May 07, 2011, 01:20:05 AM
That cost, 180 Euros, is (today) $261, which is fairly expensive... Plus the time & cost to ship from Europe. Is there an alternative? Or at least, does anyone know how long it takes to ship to the States?[/b]
I think they may not ship for 10 days. Which likely means you're looking at a month or more for delivery.
I've searched for an alternative supplier from the states. There are several other nanocrystalline core suppliers in N.A. (ie: http://www.hilltech.com/products/power_components/amorphous_nanocrystalline_cores.html#SA). The problem is in matching-up the performance characteristics, and of course, the other problem is that I don't really know what i'm doing. lol.
Hoping to find an alternate within the next couple of days.
Aphasiac.
I think people will find this excerpt pertaining similar values/effects from the Gabriel Device and "interesting" in the least:
...."the split-ring resonators (SRRs) are the most frequently used elements
for achieving effective negative permeability , excited from the time-varying magnetic
field (H-field) vertically to the SRRs plane.
In addition to the excitation from the H-field, under the electric excitation (Efield)
the SRR structures demonstrate multiple-mode resonances, which are
classified in two groups of eigenfrequencies for electric and magnetic resonances with respect
to the polarization of the illuminating E-field . Specifically, the pure electric responses
are excited once the external E-field is polarized perpendicular to the gap side of SRRs and
can be manifested as even order modes. On the other hand, the odd order
modes all contribute to the magnetic responses that are excited by the polarization
of E-field along the gap side of SRRs. The fundamental mode of SRRs can be also
regarded as the collective responses from individual LC resonators, in which the gap and the
metallic ring of SRR units represent equivalent capacitance (C) and inductance (L),
respectively . Probably once the spacing between neighboring metallic elements is
not far enough, the interaction among them will unambiguously influence the resonant
properties and the impact of coupling effect can no longer be neglected. In particular, by
breaking the geometrical symmetry of the coupled planar metamaterials, the exceptional
resonance with a very high quality factor can be used. Such a method provides the
additional freedom to manipulate the electromagnetic properties beyond the original resonant
responses of metamaterials.
As a consequence, in this study we introduce an asymmetrically coupled resonance
(ACR), from two different SRR structures in a unit cell whose resonant frequencies are
overlapped but their quality factors are manipulated at the respective small and great values.
By comparing the asymmetrically coupled SRRs from the symmetrically coupled ones, it is
evident to observe an additional transmittance peak with an enhanced quality factor rather
than the original transmittance dip with a low quality factor. Such sharp induced transparency
by the ACR effect originates from strong coupling between a narrow subradiant mode and a
broad superradiant mode in SRR structures, and is significantly modulated by the spacing of
two SRR constituents. Finally, based on various SRR structures including single SRRs,
symmetric SRR pairs and asymmetric SRR pairs, the refractive-index sensitivity and
corresponding sensing performance are further evaluated.
2. Design of SRR units
Referring to the model of standing-wave plasmonic resonances, the multi-mode resonant
frequencies of an SRR element can be quantitatively evaluated by its total length . Such partially
overlapped resonant frequency regions allow us to clarify the coupling effect from two
distinct plasmonic resonances as discussed in next section.
The spectral positions of these two SRR elements are similar, but their quality factors (Qfactors)
are much differentâ€" 13.6 for the SRRn and 3.3 for the SRRw. Two SRR structures respond similarly to
introduce circulating currents, in which the anti-parallel currents in both side arms cancel each
other giving rise to nearly zero dipole moment. Therefore, the net dipole moments excited
from the external E-field are mainly contributed from the bottom arm of SRRs, leading a
longer bottom arm in the SRRw to a broader bandwidth (defined as FWHM) of resonance due
to the fact that the radiation damping increases with the particle size. In contrast, the
SRRn with a shorter bottom arm contributes to a less radiation damping, resulting in a smaller
value of FWHM, ...."Induced transparency caused by the suppressed currents due to the destructive
interference between two radiative modes
To interpret the induced transparency from ACR response, the distribution of induced currents
in the asymmetrically integrated SRRs with four different spacings (d) is plotted as shown in
. First, while the spacing, the coupling effect from the SRRn modulates
the resonant condition in the SRRw most and indeed, the net excitation of oscillating currents
within the SRRw displays the weakest one among four cases due to the destructive
interference between resonantly interacting eigenmodes, leading the suppressed net currents to
greater transparency . To Be specific, the oscillating charges in the SRRw are excited through
two pathways: one undergoes the direct resonance in the SRRw by the external E-field, giving
rise to the induced currents in a counterclockwise direction, the other responds to the
clockwise induced currents caused by the coupling in the SRRn, and both pathways introduce
anti-parallel oscillating charges in the SRRw and in turn suppress the net excitation of induced
currents."... 17 August 2009 / Vol. 17, No. 17 / OPTICS EXPRESS 15380
I realize there's a lot of interest right now in the Muller generator. But I hope that the Gabriel device will not be forgotten or neglected!
Nanoperm core is out of the question for me but I've been looking into similar permeability products I can get in the states. Both are in tape form for easy forming... Metglass and Finemet. Have feelers out for sourcing these products but if any are aware of suppliers, please post.
Finemet appears a rather interesting substitutes.
The Magnaperm cores do have high permeability according to their specs ... over 70,000 U. The biggest limitation that I can see is that the largest of them is barely over an inch OD, so the device would be rather small.
I've tried attaching the PDF link of their tech specs directly from the web, so I hope it shows up here OK. (If it doesn't, I'll get it up here in the next post).
Got the specs for both and both are suitable candidates. The only problem is finding suppliers willing to sell. I did find the Magnoperm tape on E-Bay but would prefer to deal directly with the mfg. Sometimes they even give you free samples for your research...
Hey, dreaming is allowed isn't it?
Are ya still with us Mav? =]
Hope all is going well.
Mags
DOG!!!
Throw us a bone...
Check out Alibaba.com for cores. Alibaba is like a catalog of Chinese companies from this to that.
Like here is just 1 example
http://fskemaoyuan.en.alibaba.com/product/443082968-212419319/Ferrite_core.html
This one looks to have up to 160 mm OD ;]
There are thousands of companies. Most will send samples. ;]
Free energy for free. =]
And most want quantity orders. Of which may be necessary soon. ;]
Mags
http://www.cwsbytemark.com/index.php?main_page=index&cPath=206_221&sortby=data2&sortorder=a&page=1&sort=field&sortby=data2&sortorder=d
check out F-290-W 16,280 2.9 1.530 inch 0.500 inch W 10,000U
Most of those ferrites only have 400 uT to 600 uT...not that good...
So I had to redo my configuration about 10 times to find a nice place to settle in, changed my winding pattern inside and it seems to help alot.
Ive got consumption down to about 1.5 amps and its looking like I can take that down to 1 or even .5 amps
The voltage on my secondary is sustaining still having a issue with saturation of the inner core but, that may not matter in the end, we will see how it goes by the weekend, Ill have my voltage up and hopefully my amps down significantly, if I can prove this theory I have then actually with just a few watts you can produce 1000's of watts with the right insulated wire. still on the march to get to that nice awesome part. of hands down ou but its looking better and better daily!
Mav
Hi All,
Found this description on the Nanoperm:
Abstract:
Controlled crystallization of amorphous NANOPERM-type Fe76Mo8Cu1B15 alloy leads to the formation of crystalline grains of about 10 nm in size. The evolution of crystallization and its impact on the resulting magnetic properties is followed by nuclear and atomic based techniques of (subatomic) structural characterization comprising Mössbauer spectrometry, X-ray diffraction, transmission electron microscopy, high resolution transmission electron microscopy, differential scanning calorimetry, and atomic force microscopy. The amount of nanocrystalline grains identified as bcc-Fe rises with temperature of annealing and influences magnetic states of the original amorphous precursor. Results of structural characterization are correlated with magnetic data obtained from macroscopic measurements. In the samples with low contents of nanocrystallites, a deterioration of soft magnetic properties is observed. A very good soft magnetic behaviour is regained, however, towards the end of the primary crystallization process. (© 2006 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim)
I think the exotic nature of this material may be key. I looked at some Magnetics products and found Magnesil (K) which has 97% Fe while the others had high Ni content. They don't seem to have a comparable mix.
MotorMagik
Good info, MotorMagik-- So I feel that 97% Fe would create better field potential however, may also lead to some of the saturation problems. Maybe a High Ni content would be better though--I dunno... What are your thoughts on the matter?
Hi AmericanMan31,
Nickel has about 1/10 the permeability of Iron so this will change the saturation curves (lower saturation flux density). IMO the Nanoperm's secret lies in the 10nm magnetic domains. Perhaps the closer we get to the quantum level with these domains the better the energy transfer effect. Just guessing out loud at this point.
..."Magnetic permeability, relative increase or decrease in the resultant magnetic field inside a material compared with the magnetizing field in which the given material is located; or the property of a material that is equal to the magnetic flux density B established within the material by a magnetizing field divided by the magnetic field strength H of the magnetizing field. Magnetic permeability μ (Greek mu) is thus defined as μ = B/H. Magnetic flux density B is a measure of the actual magnetic field within a material considered as a concentration of magnetic field lines, or flux, per unit cross-sectional area. Magnetic field strength H is a measure of the magnetizing field produced by electric current flow in a coil of wire.
In empty, or free, space the magnetic flux density is the same as the magnetizing field because there is no matter to modify the field. In centimetreâ€"gramâ€"second (cgs) units, the permeability B/H of space is dimensionless and has a value of 1. In metreâ€"kilogramâ€"second (mks) and SI units, B and H have different dimensions, and the permeability of free space (symbolized μ0) is defined as equal to 4Ï€ × 10-7 weber per ampere-metre so that the mks unit of electric current may be the same as the practical unit, the ampere. In these systems the permeability, B/H, is called the absolute permeability μ of the medium. The relative permeability μr is then defined as the ratio μ/μ0, which is dimensionless and has the same numerical value as the permeability in the cgs system. ........Thus, the relative permeability of free space, or vacuum, is 1.
Materials may be classified magnetically on the basis of their permeabilities. A diamagnetic material has a constant relative permeability slightly less than 1. ....When a diamagnetic material, such as bismuth, is placed in a magnetic field, the external field is partly expelled, and the magnetic flux density within it is slightly reduced. ......A paramagnetic material has a constant relative permeability slightly more than 1. When a paramagnetic material, such as platinum, is placed in a magnetic field, it becomes slightly magnetized in the direction of the external field. A ferromagnetic material, such as iron, does not have a constant relative permeability. As the magnetizing field increases, the relative permeability increases, reaches a maximum, and then decreases. Purified iron and many magnetic alloys have maximum relative permeabilities of 100,000 or more."
BTW--Bismuth has a relative Permability LESS THAN ONE (<1)!
I Sense that having such a Diamagnetic structure as part of shell of the torus would impart a NEGATIVE field Gradient that would essentially.."Ring" the oscillatory frequency of whatever makes the device work, "spatial field coherance" or a zero-tap on the surrounding field effect coming into the inside of the shell. ..Any feedback anyone?
Here's pictures of the complete core before I start testing:
http://img830.imageshack.us/img830/6494/img0139ji.jpg
The outer core is about 10" diameter.
/Wayne
what is your outer shell made of? What is your inner core made of? What are your windings primary and secondary?
Quote from: wayne49s on May 11, 2011, 07:59:10 PM
Here's pictures of the complete core before I start testing:
http://img830.imageshack.us/img830/6494/img0139ji.jpg
The outer core is about 10" diameter.
/Wayne
Looks great!
What are the other specs?
inner core material, outer core material, wire guages, turns etc??
I cant wait to see what your results look like!
EDIT: looks like me and friendenergy were replying at the same time =oP
Quote from: importfanatik on May 11, 2011, 09:18:41 PM
Looks great!
What are the other specs?
inner core material, outer core material, wire guages, turns etc??
I cant wait to see what your results look like!
EDIT: looks like me and friendenergy were replying at the same time =oP
@friend, import
I'm using the same cores as Mav for replication; nanoperm M-417, outer core as spec. The inner core is using 15 gauge, presently 324 turns, center tapped. The outer primary winding is 18 gauge 212 turns, tapped at 100. I expect the turn windings will change as I experiment.
/Wayne
To those folks who have questions.. please please do diligence to read previous pages on this forum, MAV, the creator is overwhelmed trying to keep people contantly updated to questions or facts that have ALREADY been answered. Thank you... And Welcome!
[quote author=AmericanMan31
.....
I Sense that having such a Diamagnetic structure as part of shell of the torus would impart a NEGATIVE field Gradient that would essentially.."Ring" the oscillatory frequency of whatever makes the device work, "spatial field coherance" or a zero-tap on the surrounding field effect coming into the inside of the shell. ..Any feedback anyone?
[/quote]
I think what you are saying is what the thread "Lenz's law can be violated is talking about".
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=10595.0
/Wayne
Edit: redundant so deleted.. oops
This thread has become very quiet since romerouk started posting.
really curious if you have any results to share yet?
looking forward to hearing what others are finding
all I can say at the moment is tuning tuning and more tuning but every time it gets closer and closer learning alot about it since I changed the shell on what the mechanisms are that make it work, but the unique mode to which is operates can be accessed over and over no matter the turns ratio, its just the power requirement to get it to operate there has been somewhat trouble some, although Im pretty sure we solved that issue and should have it by the end of the week. ::crossesfingers::
Quote from: Mavendex on May 15, 2011, 02:08:41 PM
all I can say at the moment is tuning tuning and more tuning but every time it gets closer and closer learning alot about it since I changed the shell on what the mechanisms are that make it work, but the unique mode to which is operates can be accessed over and over no matter the turns ratio, its just the power requirement to get it to operate there has been somewhat trouble some, although Im pretty sure we solved that issue and should have it by the end of the week. ::crossesfingers::
Thanks for the update. Keeping fingers crossed on the tuning.
/Wayne
Mav,
Keeping my fingers crossed that you'll find the "sweet" spot and if I wasn't being slammed by work and political activism would be right there with ya.
Truly despise not be able to add to the research but still find just enough time to observe. Keep doing what I wish I was doing and know that some of us are living vicariously through your work.
Quote from: casman1969 on May 16, 2011, 05:36:23 PM
Mav,
Keeping my fingers crossed that you'll find the "sweet" spot and if I wasn't being slammed by work and political activism would be right there with ya.
Truly despise not be able to add to the research but still find just enough time to observe. Keep doing what I wish I was doing and know that some of us are living vicariously through your work.
@casman1969
Finally, someone as personally busy as I am. I'm also *scraping by* living a filthy slum populated by economy-sized, hard-core, down-and-out riffraff.
If I had the money and more freedom, as well as competent high voltage experience---without killing myself, obviously---I would do more research.
I do have a bench forum under my Internet handle at OUR. That is...
http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?board=127.0
...in the "Benches" research section at the bottom of the main, default page.
--Lee
fingers crossed you can get input voltage way down
This is NOT the appropriate place to put this but just wanted you guys to know what it is that is keeping me from helping in this project...
II Tim 1:7 God hath not given us a spirit of timidity,
but of POWER, and of LOVE, and of A SOUND MIND (SELF-CONTROL.)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zfataAlqFvY&feature=youtu.be
Get on board the train... (to those I am addressing)
http://www.riseupforamerica.com/
I won't put any more of this up and ask in advance for forgiveness...
It does fill some time while we're waiting on results (lol)
@Mav: Are you still tuning? Have you any new advice for us?
@All: What about the other replicators who ordered parts. Has everyone else set this aside for now?
I don't want this thread to die, as this is a great project for learning about coil and BEMF characteristics, as with the Romero-Muller device.
Aphasiac.
I got all the but 6 volts to be reactive power so technically we have 6watts in and 108watts out atm. I keep stepping it up and it keeps getting better :)
Mav
OH How we love good News!!
And this is astounding news!
Thanks Mavs!!
Chet
Wow, that's amazing!
Do you have any tips, tricks, and revelations to share?
Thanks for the update, Mav!
... and congratulations!
QuoteI got all the but 6 volts to be reactive power so technically we have 6watts in and 108watts out atm. I keep stepping it up and it keeps getting better :)
Mav
Does this mean 102 watts in and 108 watts out ?
great news mav!
actually its 108 and 108 but my phase angle changed to .94 instead of 1 Ive been able to take the phase angle to .5 which im currently trying to do.
Plus from what I understand by making most of the power reactive we arn't consuming that energy and its getting returned to the source. So in essence if Im useing 6 volts and 1 amp then and 117 volts are returning to the source then we are in pretty good shape.
more of a Inductor/Transformer/Capacitance thingy
going for 200 volts and a amp off the secondary next.
Mav
Quote from: Mavendex on May 18, 2011, 11:35:05 AM
I got all the but 6 volts to be reactive power so technically we have 6watts in and 108watts out atm. I keep stepping it up and it keeps getting better :)
Mav
Hey Mav
Good stuff. Im not sure what your last post meant by 108 and 108.
Are you still using the amplifier for input?
I have been doing some tests with the multi core, but I need a scope. I have a RS probe scope but its not a very detailed view. Was looking at scopes a while ago, but waited. This is what Im looking at now. It is the next gen pocket scope from Arm. I like it.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ARM-DSO203-Nano-V2-Quad-Pocket-Digital-Oscilloscope-/280658851796?pt=BI_Oscilloscopes&hash=item41589237d4
Keep on keepin on Mav. Glad to see you check in periodically. Be careful. ;]
All,
We are all anticipating progress. It will take time. It will take time to get rid of the toaster. It will take time to make determinations of the hows and whys.
Im glad the critics are rare here. Its refreshing. ;]
Mags
Im not sure what your last post meant by 108 and 108.
108 watts from the wall, 108 watts from the secondary with a PF from the wall being .94 is what that means
5 watt gain.
But again how much of that 108 watts is real or imaginary from the wall, 6 watts are real the rest is imaginary.
Are you still using the amplifier for input?
nope I was using a couple of toasters in parallel that only drew .9 amps total I couldn't get it to draw more if I tried, If I put my voltage probes in the surge suppressor it read 6 volts the Va on the kilowatt meter read 116.
My total input from the wall was 122 volts .9 amps so resistance wise I was using 6 watts and 116 volts returned to the source.
We are all anticipating progress. It will take time. It will take time to get rid of the toaster. It will take time to make determinations of the hows and whys.
Im glad the critics are rare here. Its refreshing. ;]
Can't debunk something that works :) Everything I have read about reactive power says it gets reflected back to the source so yay for us :D
Mav
No luck using an inverter and a 12V battery?
Hey Mav,
Hep me here... 6V @1A in? Am I reading that right? Then 108 and 108. I'm not critical just trying to follow what you are saying since it sounds as if you're having positive progress.
BTW did you insulate between the halves of the steel doughnut and what material are you using for your secondary core? AWG of inner and outer? Secondary dimensions and turns on it?
Man, now I know what it feels like to pester (lol).
Keep it flowing Mav...
And then, of course, you answered the in out question before I hit reply. Gotta love it.
Quote from: Mavendex on May 18, 2011, 01:08:07 PM
Im not sure what your last post meant by 108 and 108.
108 watts from the wall, 108 watts from the secondary with a PF from the wall being .94 is what that means
5 watt gain.
But again how much of that 108 watts is real or imaginary from the wall, 6 watts are real the rest is imaginary.
Are you still using the amplifier for input?
nope I was using a couple of toasters in parallel that only drew .9 amps total I couldn't get it to draw more if I tried, If I put my voltage probes in the surge suppressor it read 6 volts the Va on the kilowatt meter read 116.
My total input from the wall was 122 volts .9 amps so resistance wise I was using 6 watts and 116 volts returned to the source.
We are all anticipating progress. It will take time. It will take time to get rid of the toaster. It will take time to make determinations of the hows and whys.
Im glad the critics are rare here. Its refreshing. ;]
Can't debunk something that works :) Everything I have read about reactive power says it gets reflected back to the source so yay for us :D
Mav
Mav and all -- I'm very hopeful for this Gabriel device. It seems simpler in many ways compared to the other front-runner (IMO), which is the Muller/RomeroUK device.
The Gabriel has no moving parts, which is great.
Now - the question of MEASUREMENT arises again. So important. I realize folks are using a "kill-o-watt" meter, and that makes some sense. But there are other means that may be more reliable.
Here I'm offering another method, using the Power function of a Tektronix 3032B which I have been using for some months (on solid state devices that may show OU). I'm used to measuring voltage from the input and voltage-drop across a KNOWN RESISTOR (which I call a "current-sensing resistor" = CSR).
The Tektronix DPO displays the instantaneous math product of these, providing the POWER WAVEFORM. Then it calculates for me (built-in function when one knows how to use it) the MEAN POWER. So we have finally a single number calculated as the INPUT POWER -- but we also have the Power Waveform so we can SEE what is going on.
Pinput = MEAN [ Vin(t) * Iin(t) ]
We do the same thing for the output power --
Pout = MEAN [ Vout(t) * Iout(t) ],
letting the Tektronix 3032 do the work.
Finally, the efficiency n = Pout/ Pin, which is >1 for an OU device.
I trust this approach more than taking RMS measurements -- note that trying to calculate Power from Vrms X Irms will give ERRONEOUS RESULTS when the instantaneous V(t) and I(t) are out of phase.
You really need to let the scope do the instantaneous product and calculate the mean power in (and mean power out) to get reliable results.
Hope this helps. I offer the use of my expertise and equipment if any one wants to try this independent method of evaluating the input and output POWER reliably and accurately. My time is limited, but I'd be glad to help where I can.
I'm going to go ahead and attach an example of what I'm talking about -- from a very low-power circuit I've been studying, data acquired today. (See attached.) The red waveform represents [ Vin(t) * Iin(t) ] and the mean value of the input power is calculated over numerous cycles.
Note that I take the mean power over many cycles using the math function of the scope, to get greater accuracy (it's a bit dubious to rely on mean power over just one cycle in a case like this).
BTW for anyone thinking about ordering from Magnetec.. They ship FAST, like, SAME-DAY-FAST!!
I ordered my M-417 from there and I already Missed the first delivery attempt..And I live in Oregon, so be SURE to be home when they ship it!
Quote from: casman1969 on May 18, 2011, 06:47:07 PM
Hey Mav,
Hep me here... 6V @1A in? Am I reading that right? Then 108 and 108. I'm not critical just trying to follow what you are saying since it sounds as if you're having positive progress.
BTW did you insulate between the halves of the steel doughnut and what material are you using for your secondary core? AWG of inner and outer? Secondary dimensions and turns on it?
Man, now I know what it feels like to pester (lol).
Keep it flowing Mav...
6V @.9A in this is what the toaster(s) are consuming all together now instead of a full on 120v, the 108 is 120 volts from the wall and .9 amps with a pf of .94, the secondary is at 108 and 1 amp with a pf of 1. There is 116 Va this is the reactive power. now in a sense if I can get it to consume 0 volts and 1 amp then we are essentially useing 0 watts and everything is reactive and it flows back and forth to and from the source so eventually it will be nothing.
BTW did you insulate between the halves of the steel doughnut yes
what material are you using for your secondary core the same nanoperm core
AWG of inner and outer?both 16 still
Secondary dimensions and turns on it? enough to fit inside the outercore, and alot probably somewhere in the neighborhood of 800 or so but im doing my turns a bit different than the conventional method. More length of wire and less turns has given me better and better reactance.
Tips and Tricks:: I have found that you should have your inner widings and outer core as tightly packed as possible, Theory on that is most of the magnetic juice so to speak is confined to the outershell.
Theory on the extra energy, Its a vacuum of magnetism if you have high pressure and low pressure in perfect atmospheric conditions you get tornadoes, if you look at it from the top down and visualize that when energized you have a clockwise motion of magnetism and a counter clock wise motion of magnetism EMF going one way, Back emf going the other. at least thats the general idea. Along with all the tricks of high reluctance cores and low reluctance cores there is a window to where it works best and not so good at all.
The more reactant you have the better it is and so far I haven't found a limit on how reactive I can make it.
Mav
Thank you Mav for the detailed explanation. This is what open source is all about and you are right up there with Bruce in being transparent. It's making my visits here so much more enjoyable and I can't get over how troll free this thread appears to be.
Following your progress daily.
Hey Mav
Great stuff. In your description, it sounds like you have a two core Russian rag doll where the secondary shares the primary core(shell) and the secondary has its own separate core.
Ill be showing my doll soon. Rewinding for higher no. of turns and finer wire to get it to operate in the audio freq range. its just a baby doll. lol
Thanks for all your doing Mav. You will need a vacation "wind" down. ;]
Mags
Regarding the method I posted above, and a brief introduction since I'm a newbie here, please see this thread:
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=10773.0
or here for more:
http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=853.msg14115#msg14115
Best wishes to you builders and measurers out there. Let's get 'er done!
Just thinking aloud here.. all of us have greatly made aware of many fantastic new and anomolous technologies, where, every new development brings to mind even more and more questions about the reality of physics we are governed by. From the "2SGen" in jean-louis Naudins' Labs, the Dr. Stiffler research with the "SEC exciter"..the "Ruhmikov coils" and "Joule Thief" variants. Most of the pioneering and REAL developments in "SCIENCE" are from experimentors like us that have a passion for these discoveries. (Let us not forget the "scientific method" and recording of "data" which makes the minutia of information, however ambiguous, leading to then to REALIZE Fantastic new paradigm shifts and advancements.)
I honor each spirit of those in this forum who diligently seek to better this world through God-given talents and new visions..
I seem to think that "Gabby" (as Mav so endearingly puts it)
Behaves as some of variable induction transforme, the inductive reactance seems irrelavant, in some ways, a........(continued).
(continued)....And, at other times violates the Lentz law. I believe Gabby can use the energy on a capacitor and "Load" another "Gabby" using a sort of "oscillatory coherance" in a similiar manner to the "MEG" from Tom Bearden, or Stiffler. I once heard Mr. Dale Pond describe that The three fundamental modes of vibration are ALL longitudinal, horizontal at 90 degrees, and rotational... you cannot have one without the other 2. They are intertwined components. In the electromagnetic scale of forces you start with "1" Hertz then "2" Hertz and they are doubled in frequency (and amplitude?) until @ the 21st octave, their becomes a mode shift to the predominance of the Longitudinal and then on to the predominance of the Transverse..and as you go higher than that the predominance changes again....(continued)
(continued).. SO Here's a question for you..How can the Sun heat the Earth from over 193 million miles of vacuum space if their is no medium between? The polar forces coming from the Sun are balanced, intertwined together concordantly. I encourage you to visit my channel to gain a deeper understanding of these concepts. http://www.youtube.com/user/MichaelSmathers?feature=mhsn
The Gabriel Device is tapping a vibratory condition of intertwined potential..we in essence have the reigns to a very large "tiger" now we must tame/train him. I need to find out which resonant frequency octave would work best with the M-417 Nanoperm(just got it!) with the secondary being a quadifilar rodin coil wound CW and CCW to facilitate ringing a standing wave within the primary (induced with normal winding method, but bifilar, and 180 degrees out of phase....(continued)
(continued).. It leads me to believe that "Gabby" is trying to "lock" on to an octave, frequency-or whatever is making the primary charge in the shell..But, perhaps the source being 60hz is "dirty" and not purely "sine wave." What are your thoughts?
I also think that my Rodin coils areresonant @ ~40,000 Hz as an "aircore"
..so I wonder what a huge nanoperm like Gabby would be?
Is it conducive to guess that it would be lower, with more reactance in play??..I am betting that our use of "brute force" charging the primary with so much juice is like a bull in a "china shop" it may be that the subtletiveness of what is occuring demands a more refined procurement of the understanding of electrical/magnetic behavior that is going on in Gabby. Let's hope that through a few trials, that we find it requires just ever so many volts (millivolts?) to regauge a truly remarkable cop>1.
Quote from: Mavendex on May 19, 2011, 11:15:19 AM
Secondary dimensions and turns on it? enough to fit inside the outercore, and alot probably somewhere in the neighborhood of 800 or so but im doing my turns a bit different than the conventional method. More length of wire and less turns has given me better and better reactance.
Mav
More length of wire and less turns? Hmmm, how would you go about doing that? Wind it at an angle?
Quote from: alisima on May 20, 2011, 07:03:11 AM
More length of wire and less turns? Hmmm, how would you go about doing that? Wind it at an angle?
http://www.alexpetty.com/2009/10/03/buturff-petty-360-1232-rodin-coil-winding-series/ something like that only I kinda changed how this one works but its the general idea explore explore explore
Quote from: Mavendex on May 20, 2011, 09:20:21 AM
http://www.alexpetty.com/2009/10/03/buturff-petty-360-1232-rodin-coil-winding-series/
Now thát is manual labor :) Nice stuff btw. Rodin and his doubling sequence.
Quote from: Mavendex on May 20, 2011, 09:20:21 AM
something like that only I kinda changed how this one works but its the general idea explore explore explore
Explore; yes, indeed.
First of all, congrats to you all, regardless of whether we'll get this device working, the endeavour itself is marvelous to say the least.
The only resistance we have is the unstructured form in which this is being undertook. I mean, trying to replicate this means reading 28 pages on this forum, pages which are intertwined with spam, exotic theories and outdated info. For instance, i still find the M-147 part all over the internet.
I know it ain't as easy as it at first glance seems, and I am certainly not downgrading any of you, I think you are doing a service to mankind by merely pondering over this "COP > 1" concept, and some of you are doing much more. Still, it would be a shame if we all reinvent the wheel 4 times over. Which ofcourse isn't easily sidestepped, but I still feel a little bit of documentation/rapporting would help.
Anyhow, I'm starting my own exploring in a couple of weeks, when I have the time and resources.
Thank you all for sharing what you know.
I have formed a newly submitted Polls for the Gabriel Device at yahoo groups.
It asks some information consensus and should be given some thought to think about. Thanks in advance--for the participation! :)
BTW check this out!: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g5hBsQBz7Nw
Alisima...
e2matrix and I have posted a document that summarizes the construction info on this device so you don't have to read everything and sift through it. I've updated it with the latest info on the windings. This will be periodically updated and re-posted.
Anyone can update these with new info. BTW, there is a limit of 500KB on uploaded files, and this is currently about 370. We might have to segment this info eventually.
Quote from: AmericanMan31 on May 21, 2011, 11:14:09 PM
I have formed a newly submitted Polls for the Gabriel Device at yahoo groups.
It asks some information consensus and should be given some thought to think about. Thanks in advance--for the participation! :)
BTW check this out!: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g5hBsQBz7Nw
Let's keep the posings centralized at OU, not scaterred?
taomaster Thanks.
Mavendex, I think that bifilar tesla or bifilar mirror can do a good job.
Also, if I understand you now get 108 Watts output with 108 watts in caloric work (the toaster), from the electric utility input 108 wats. Then COP=2.
I believe that working in more power like 1000 Watts output is better with 300 watts input that 108 output with 108 input.
Thanks.
Teslaalset
Quote:
Let's keep the postings centralized at OU, not scaterred?
--------------------
Good Idea!
BTW Thanks for all you do!,Well "Thanks" just really doesn't say it!
You're a huge asset to this community and our planet......
That seems to be a theme here,makes me quite humble and very proud to see you men working this way!!
I think we're going to need some new words,I find my vocabulary lacking for the proper words.............
Shizzle me Nizzle !
Chet
Quote from: Elisha on May 22, 2011, 08:22:01 AM
taomaster Thanks.
Mavendex, I think that bifilar tesla or bifilar mirror can do a good job.
Also, if I understand you now get 108 Watts output with 108 watts in caloric work (the toaster), from the electric utility input 108 wats. Then COP=2.
I believe that working in more power like 1000 Watts output is better with 300 watts input that 108 output with 108 input.
Thanks.
Gotta walk before you can run gotta run before you can fly gotta fly before you can teleport.
Hey Mav
I know you have been working your fingers to the Core. ;]
Was wondering what results you had when using the amp as input, as it seems you were excited at the time, but now we are using 2 toasters.
Was thinking, if the toasters are needed as a voltage limiter(?) maybe with an addition of some new(added) outer(Tertiary/3rd) core, might help increase the primary inductance and help prevent too much getting to the sec.(?)
OR, 2 whole devices with the primary in series? 3? As where the toaster probably just creates useless heat.
Dunno. Just thinkin. ;]
Mags
The power amp was looking more and more vampiric but making it all reactive power seems to give it more juice plus, the things I really look for is a voltage cap on the secondary unloaded, it doesn't change much with the turns you put on the primary from then on out, theres a window that seems to be in relation of so many primary turns you can have that allow it to unload after that point it seems to revert ever so slightly not a full reflection, so far I have just been doing the scientific method, and trying different power sources, getting some tips from some people.
So far I have been peeling off a layer of insulated wire and adding mag wire in its place and the results are getting better and better more voltage on start up but it takes less power to get it there consecutively in each rebuild, how far that will go I'm hoping back to the original or better position,
I experimented with rodin turns this time just to see what kind of differences I can expect. Interesting more amps total go in but the power factor of the whole primary goes down a .10 more. kind of a trade off.
Thats all I really look for, I add turns to the primary to see how fast the PF will go down without retarding the innercore too much,then check it again this is where I saw 5 watts.
This time we will fill the whole bitt up with magwire taking out the insulated wire completely and hopefully getting a better result. at 3.3 ohms currently and holding out at 130 volts and my free amp, that nose we started out with has been cut in have to be at 2.5 amps for startup costs, the last time we were at 3.3 ohms we had some kind of a wierd short that was taking us 5 amps worth of power just to get it to sustain 180 volts and get our free amp.
That arc most likely took out a bunch of that wire in the beginning, since then I have insulated the inner core as well just so we don't have that issue.
Gotta love replicating :)
Mav
Here's what I think is "going-on" inside the Gabby..--Like the 2SGen by JL Naudin,.. we have a nanoperm, ok, even though the primary is not directly wound onto the nanoperm in Gabby, the resultant field has two critical oscillations going on between the shell (steel) and the nanoperm (Fe). In the 2sgen the pulsed frequency IS THE "oscillation".. and in gabby, it IS the collapsing field of BOTH metals,, one being contained in a "Farady cage", and the other providing a dense medium to "refract upon"
So.. with the collapsing field of both Metals (Gabby), It is analogous to the inner workings of a "churchbell" you have a hammer pendul inside the bell "driving" the frequency (oscillation) the nanoperm in this case would be the "hammer" inside the Faraday steel "shell" , and acoustically,..in order for the field to escape its only path is to follow the secondary wires out of the device. What do YOU think? (Anyway, I see a lot of correlation between the 2SGen and the Gabby)
I like Cliffs response... This does not explain where or how the extra energy to yield an over unity
condition is extracted from the Dirac Sea. As for the inner workings of the two
magnetic circuits I see two simple controlling relationships.
I see it in much simpler terms involving the nature of the toroid itself, and
the ratio of reluctances between the two cores forcing a controlled split of the
magnetic flux between the two cores. The reluctance of a magnetic circuit is
l/μA, where l is the mean magnetic length around the toroid, A the core
cross sectional area, and μ the permeability of the material. The two cores
effectively present themselves as two magnetic circuits in parallel. Just like
two different resistors in parallel will split current flow according to the
value of the resistors 1/R = 1/R1 + 1/R2, so too the magnetic flux is split
between the two cores, according to their permeability ratio and area ratio
combined. Both core area and permeability variables may be played against each
other.
In essence high permeability (Mu) and large core area for the inner core yields
a much lower reluctance (magnetic resistance) than the outer toroidal shell with
much lower permeability and much smaller cross sectional area. One can achieve a
30:1 Mu ratio and a 10:1 core area ratio, and in combination a 300:1 ratio
splits magnetic flux around the two toroids in that ratio. A 0.6 Tesla flux
density in the inner core (say 600 micro Webers of flux) results in 2 micro
Webers of flux in the outer shell (flux density of 0.02 Tesla). Reluctance ratio
dictates the flux ratio between the two cores, simply as the ratio of
resistances in parallel splits current in terms of their resistance ratio.
This is interesting because over 99% of the flux in the circuit appears within
the inner core, and hence dictates magnetizing current of the primary. The
toroidal action of the outer shell ensures its center is also magnetized, this
magnetizing the inner core, and almost all the magnetic flux is captured by the
inner core due to its very low reluctance. The inner core core prevents the
outer shell from saturating, but the outer shell cannot be too thin. This means
the inner core dictates the number of primary turns, depending on the desired
level of magnetizing current needed.
So the toroidal action of the outer shell guarantees the inner core is
magnetized, and both toroids together dictate the total magnetizing current.
Now, what about the toroidal action of the inner core? Toroidal action consists
of two elements: a) the region inside the coil focuses flux within the coil and
within the core, as in the example above where both cores within the primary
coil are subjected to the primary magnetizing current; b) little if any magnetic
flux is allowed to leave the region of the core.
It is the 2nd element of toroidal action which explains why the back-EMF of the
secondary does not reach the primary magnetic circuit. Unlike the splitting of
flux between the two cores described above which are completely under the
auspices of the primary toroidal action covering both cores, the secondary
circuit is also an independent toroid in its own right. The toroidal action of
the secondary coil forces flux to be confined to the inner core (i.e. flux
leakage is discouraged), and there is little if any means available for the
secondary magnetic flux to influence the primary magnetic circuit. Therefore
load on the secondary is not allowed to be reflected to the primary. This is not
strictly a violation of Lenz's law, but merely enhances that law in terms of
defining coupling performance. It is poor coupling performance which prevents
secondary back-EMF flux influencing the primary circuit, and Lenz's law as
normally described merely refers to 100% coupling between the two circuits. The
inner toroid is disconnected from the primary circuit by virtue of its own
toroidal action. This is the beauty of the Klingelhoeffer bi-toroid nested
construction as opposed to the Thane Heins side-by-side construction.
So over unity coefficient of performance derives from less than perfect coupling
performance between primary and secondary. The inner toroid destroys this
coupling by the nature of its own toroidal action - flux forcibly confined to
the inner core means there is no mechanism for playing out Lenz's law to full
effect - only leakage flux could reach the primary circuit. It is the two coils
on the same core which ensures 100% coupling in a traditional Lenz law
configuration, and a disconnect between the two coils and two cores which
reduces coupling between the two magnetic circuits.
So this explains the thwarting of Lenz's law, but still does not explain the
source or mechanism of the over unity energy. Somehow the secondary coil in the
region outside the inner core is able to connect to an alternate source of
energy than the primary circuit. This part of the physics remain mysterious. I
see two elements to this Thane Heins effect - decoupling reduction and secondary
coil interaction with the Dirac Sea. The Klingelhoeffer construction focuses
more deeply on these two issues, and tends to more clearly differentiate these
two elements by introducing a nested bi-toroid construction, and offers a
different toroidal action perspective thereby. I do not think there is a single
effect in operation here.
One probably does not need nano crystalline core material to demonstrate this
reduction in magnetic circuit coupling. High permeability Mu metal inner
toroidal core and low permeability outer shell likely will work just as well.
Mavendex ,..
Would you consider placing a strong neodymium magnet on the secondary wires (like the 2SGen) to see if there is a greater release of energy? I believe there would be,. Do you have enough room for that in your shell? I suppose there would be room If you stuck one to the inside of the nanoperm away from the wires, angled "into the torus". ;) What do you think?
a magnet will stop the ac from working you can try that on a normal transformer because the ac oscillates the magnetic domains but if you put a magnet on it then it makes the magnetic domains static and they won't change thus no energy transfer and no output.
AmericanMan31:
QuoteSomehow the secondary coil in the
region outside the inner core is able to connect to an alternate source of
energy than the primary circuit.
This makes some sense to me; but would appreciate any explanation of what is ESSENTIAL in the design in order for this to occur.
Has any one completed a replication and a test of this device? Sure, I'm interested in the RomeroUK device too, but I still like this Gabriel-device approach very much personally.
Quote from: taomaster on May 22, 2011, 04:39:47 AM
....
BTW, there is a limit of 500KB on uploaded files, and this is currently about 370. We might have to segment this info eventually.
Hi Taomaster,
The 500kB upload limit is valid for files attached to posts here but there is an Upload/Download file transfer section too:
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=downloads
where the size limit is 5MB.
Go down to Category Names to choose the upload place.
Gyula
Does anybody know the inside AND outside diameter of the steel shell?.. I am trying to determine what kind of Rodin winding I can accomplish within the diameter of the shell. Thank You! ;)
Nevermind, I found the dimensions I was looking for : I.D.=60mm ;)
I started doing some tests, but am too busy with completing my house to complete the testing, but here's some results in case someone wants to analyse what it means. Configuration: I have a Kilowatt meter measuring the power at the wall socket, connected to an autotransformer; the output is to the device. The idle power on the autotransformer is about 10 watts.
See attached file
My secondary current measurement, I think is not accurate, so will use a low value resistor instead of the current coil probe for further tests. Plan to rectify the output. The results seem to indicate that at no load & low voltage, the secondary coil receives all the flux from the primary (even more?), but this changes as the voltage input is increased; or a secondary load is applied.
/Wayne
Quote from: wayne49s on May 26, 2011, 08:05:32 AM
I started doing some tests, but am too busy with completing my house to complete the testing, but here's some results in case someone wants to analyse what it means. Configuration: I have a Kilowatt meter measuring the power at the wall socket, connected to an autotransformer; the output is to the device. The idle power on the autotransformer is about 10 watts.
See attached file
My secondary current measurement, I think is not accurate, so will use a low value resistor instead of the current coil probe for further tests. Plan to rectify the output. The results seem to indicate that at no load & low voltage, the secondary coil receives all the flux from the primary (even more?), but this changes as the voltage input is increased; or a secondary load is applied.
/Wayne
Thanks Wayne, good work documenting your results in a structured and scientific format. I wish more people on this board would do that.
What type of load is connected to the secondary during your tests? Also, what are the 20w loads on the primary? are they toasters?
Quote from: importfanatik on May 26, 2011, 09:33:19 AM
Thanks Wayne, good work documenting your results in a structured and scientific format. I wish more people on this board would do that.
What type of load is connected to the secondary during your tests? Also, what are the 20w loads on the primary? are they toasters?
@import
They are halogen lights 20watt each @12V.
Has anyone tried using an AC capacitor in series with the primary? ;]
I cant specify a value other than one that can handle the voltage. Experiment. ;]
Mags
I ordered a autotransformer Ty Wayne.
Here is an idea, assuming the secondary core acts as a delay. Flux in secondary winding goes through this core and primary winding sees voltage that is in different phase, sort of delayed. So instead of this back EMF causing voltage drop in primary it will cause voltage increase. If this back emf could be delayed 180 degrees then it would add to primary in its entirety. The Tesla transformer that used two iron cores is based on this principle. In Tesla patent it was mentioned that you can take power out of it at constant amperage. Not sure what this statement actually means, you add more load you will always get same amperage out without taking it from the source ?
Now if this is what is going on in this transformer (or the Tesla version), then what happens if you put capacitor in the primary in parallel with the primary coil. You would then charge up capacitor once and it would begin to oscillate as normal LC tank circuit. This oscillation goes in the secondary and when you put load there the back emf would get added there and stored back in the capacitor. Capacitor would never deplete and oscillation would continue forever or as long as you take load out from secondary ?
As the name implies, I am new to this stuff, but I think there is overunity already in the LC circuit itself. You charge it once with half sine wave to some voltage, then it oscillates for a period of time and output is many sine waves though decreasing depending on the resistance of the L coil. Higher the frequency, less wire needed in the L coil and less resistance thus LC circuit rings longer. By putting pickup coil in the LC circuit you can then take this oscillation in another circuit. With proper 'fencing' this another circuit would not interfere with the primary, e.g. use low coupling between coils e.g. bifilar pancake or iron shield between windings.
Jack
Welcome! You are new here but your statements are much consistent then many old members !
Yes,you are correct.
Look here also http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=10666.msg283323#msg283323
Quote from: Jack Noskills on May 27, 2011, 07:31:27 AM
Here is an idea, assuming the secondary core acts as a delay. Flux in secondary winding goes through this core and primary winding sees voltage that is in different phase, sort of delayed. So instead of this back EMF causing voltage drop in primary it will cause voltage increase. If this back emf could be delayed 180 degrees then it would add to primary in its entirety. The Tesla transformer that used two iron cores is based on this principle. In Tesla patent it was mentioned that you can take power out of it at constant amperage. Not sure what this statement actually means, you add more load you will always get same amperage out without taking it from the source ?
Now if this is what is going on in this transformer (or the Tesla version), then what happens if you put capacitor in the primary in parallel with the primary coil. You would then charge up capacitor once and it would begin to oscillate as normal LC tank circuit. This oscillation goes in the secondary and when you put load there the back emf would get added there and stored back in the capacitor. Capacitor would never deplete and oscillation would continue forever or as long as you take load out from secondary ?
As the name implies, I am new to this stuff, but I think there is overunity already in the LC circuit itself. You charge it once with half sine wave to some voltage, then it oscillates for a period of time and output is many sine waves though decreasing depending on the resistance of the L coil. Higher the frequency, less wire needed in the L coil and less resistance thus LC circuit rings longer. By putting pickup coil in the LC circuit you can then take this oscillation in another circuit. With proper 'fencing' this another circuit would not interfere with the primary, e.g. use low coupling between coils e.g. bifilar pancake or iron shield between windings.
Your explanation for the voltage increase is interesting. It was very consistent at the low voltage and the meter reading is accurate to 1%. I thought of the LC circuit also, but from the point that it generates high current in the primary while presenting high impedence to the input power. Also pulsing it on part of the time may improve OU as you mentioned. Lots of experimentation to do.
Wayne I have been doing a much higher turns ratio and find as the closer the innerwindings get to the outershell or if they are right next toit it will take less power to make the device work, obviously I probably have been overcharging it from the start, I get pretty primal sometimes and my bruteforce tactics probably need refined hehe,
but with those tactics I did find that it will infact take less current to charge the device if you have your turns closer to the outershell mabye we should think about a even smaller shell to accomadate the 1:1 turns ratio this would improve the ou factor as well.
Just some thoughts
Mav
I realised use of capacitor would not work very well with low frequency signal since f = 1/2*pi*sqrt(LC). To get 50/60 Hz from this you would need large L which would mean high R. Or really high C for the capacitor.
I propose some ideas for testing purposes, not sure what exactly is the current consensus with testing, but here goes:
You want to highest possible magnetic field generated by the primary without saturating the iron core. Tinplated teflon coated wire gives three times the magnetic field comapred to plain copper wire. Then bifilar wound winding gives two times better magnetic field than normal, maybe Rodin winding gives even better but it is hideous to wind.
The inner secondary wind generates also magnetic field but it should not reach iron core. So I would suggest using plain copper and normal wind there as we dont need its magnetic field. I think it would make sense to try thinner wire. I believe that thinner wire generates field that does not reach as far as thicker wire. Maybe magnetic field is not a field at all but a wave which behaves like rod in water, thicker rod produces wider waves. As amplitude of wave decreases between each wave then shorter wave decreases faster.
I am thinking of magnetic waves instead of magnetic fields as present theory does not explain magnetic current. I observed magnetic current when I played with E shaped iron plates placed against each other so that a loop was formed. I got two coils in the middle on both E's. When I run current through one coil those E plates sticked together and remained so even after power was disconnected for a long time. Higher the electric current harder they sticked together. Iron would not stick on the outside so it was not as the iron was turned into a magnet. After I forced E plates off by hand they were again normal plates of iron and wouldn't stick. Weird. I was not able to figure out a way to make use of this magnetic current though.
So, this makes me think that if there is a current then there should be waves too. What is seen as magnetic field would actually be peaks of these waves.
Quote from: Mavendex on May 29, 2011, 11:08:54 AM
Wayne I have been doing a much higher turns ratio and find as the closer the innerwindings get to the outershell or if they are right next toit it will take less power to make the device work, obviously I probably have been overcharging it from the start, I get pretty primal sometimes and my bruteforce tactics probably need refined hehe,
but with those tactics I did find that it will infact take less current to charge the device if you have your turns closer to the outershell mabye we should think about a even smaller shell to accomadate the 1:1 turns ratio this would improve the ou factor as well.
Just some thoughts
Mav
Hi Mav, good to get your insight based on your experiments.. You've have the most experience on this device. I'll keep in mind what you mentioned for later experiment.
@Jack
The secondary wire size is also defined by the current expected too.
Maybe wind more turns on primary to avoid saturation and increase inductance... You don't need toaster anymore, in short:
In USA you have 120 V, 60 Hz OK. The cross section of the M 417 is only 2.78 square centimeter... With Boucherot formula (V=4.44*N*F*(S/10^4)*B) with V in Volts, N is turns of wire, F frequency in Hertz, S effective surface (Afe) in square centimeter and B is induction in Teslas... For USA grid the turn number must be: 1475 turns !!! --> Out of the windows...
I sugest you use power amp or variable inverter for example 225 turns you need the famous 400 hertz a motor generator set can do the trick...
Or use Power amp (I have one at 24V at 3 amps per channel...)
Use of course 1/1 ratio and what hapen when you put a load ?
A theory is the shield when it is saturated, it inverse the polarity of the magnetic field. The magnetic field helping each other instead fighting in conventional trafos... See this: http://www.rexresearch.com/ecklin/ecklin.htm (http://www.rexresearch.com/ecklin/ecklin.htm) especially Fig3 and Fig4 with the shield... Anyone can test those theories ?
Cliff (vgrayus2 in Yahoo Gabriel_OS group), that was an extremely valuable file you uploaded (Nested B-Toroid Calcs). You put an incredible amount of work into it, and I am very impressed with your skill and dedication. (We can certainly ignore the few typos!)
I can't critique the electronics math, since I don't have the relevant expertise, however, I think you raised some very good points, and gave some incredibly good ideas for trying to make this a practicable (and affordable) device.
For example: (1) stacking several inner cores and wrapping them as a unit to increase power output, (2) using steel pipe to form "barrel-shaped" outer toroids to resolve the issues of costly shaping and capacity limitations, and (3) using more affordable, alternative inner core material to make the device more practicable. The tables you give for constructing different power configurations are also extremely interesting.
I don't really have the expertise in electronics to design anything like this. However, I do have experience in statistical research, so I understand how important it is to do tests at specific "values" (aka device configurations) to confirm the boundaries of predictable behavior. You appear to come very close to laying out a "workable" basic configuration for the Gabriel device. However, it seems to me that we're still not at a point yet where a "basic" configuration has been shown to be reproducible, much less where any outer boundaries lie.
I hope that some of you experimenters out there who actually know what he's talking about (and have the time and money) will put some of these ideas to good use.
Thank you for responce, I put a lot work in this because I have always believe Trafos can be OU, Actually conventional Trafos are the most efficient device of this world (Ein and Eout can be up to 99% !!) Trafos are (in higher frequency) light, simple, cost effective, very reliable and beautiful^^ For me a FE device based on trafos is the "Saint Graal" of the energy conversion world !!! Imagine tomorrow you need a 2 or 3Kw FE generator for your heating because your wife have said it's very cold in your home, you take your car go to the hypermarket and buy a OU trafos of 3Kw, the life isn't beautiful, no ?
Also recently nuclear crisis in Japan (Japan is a country that I love very much), it's time to shift with another method to "produce", store and consume energy, and banish dangerous technology like nuke... A dream maybe but a good dream...
Sorry for two consecutive post, here a "gift" of my theories...
Relationship between "Gabriel device" and Tesla Patent 433.702:
QuoteTesla Quote:
This invention is an improvement in electrical transformers or converters, and has for its main objects the provision of means for securing, first, a phase difference between the primary and secondary currents adapted to the operation of my alternating-current motors and other like purposes, and, second, a constant current for all loads imposed upon the secondary.
It's very clear here: the outer core (the shield) is magnetized first and slightly after the inner core become magnetized, providing a phase difference, maybe a simple technique to create 3 phases from one without inverter and fancy stuff. The phase difference can be tuned by the thickness of the shield more it's thick, more you have phase difference...
Secondo: It's obvious (for me of course...) Tesla speak of OU characteristic...
In short: when you put a load in the secondary the primary current remain the same (only magnetising current) PF=0, while providing real energy PF=1...
QuoteIn transformers as constructed now and heretofore it will be found that the electro-motive force of the secondary very nearly coincides with that of the primary, being, however, of opposite sign.
LOL, Conventional energy waster Trafos in full action here, and a wink to the Lenz Law... Tesla I think you can give a spanking to the human beings LOL after a century we continue to waste energy in Trafos, Sorry...
QuoteUnder these conditions or circumstances, as long as the primary current has a small value, the shield protects the secondary; but as soon as the primary current has reached a certain strength, which is arbitrarily determined, the protecting magnetic shield becomes saturated and the inductive action upon the secondary begins. It results, therefore, that the secondary current begins to flow at a certain fraction of a period later than it would without the interposed shield, and since this retardation may be obtained without necessarily retarding the primary current also, an additional lag is secured, and the time interval between the maximum or minimum periods of the primary and secondary currents is increased
Here the whole explanation of the phase difference effect, no more comment from me...
Quote I have further discovered that such a transformer may, by properly proportioning its several elements and determining in a manner well understood the proper relations between the primary and secondary windings, the thickness of the magnetic shield, and other conditions, be constructed to yield a constant current at all loads. No precise rules can be given for the specific construction and proportions for securing the best results, as this is a matter determined by experiment and calculation in particular cases; but the general plan of construction which I have described will be found under all conditions to conduce to the attainment of this result.
Everything is said here, thickness of material an several other condition (the difference between permeability and reluctance stuff to extract the more power possible without impacting the primary) Need some calculation (see above and the Thane BITT topic which I have wrote some theories and formula about this...
After in the patent is the description of the drawings...
Voila, maybe some keys to understand the Grabriel device (Tesla induction device) and try to reproduce the experiment in scientific method...
1° Correct Ampere turns to avoid saturation of the inner core and avoid the toaster limiter... (Use Boucherot formula)
2° Use a small shield for the primary (it can saturate more easily and have a high reluctance...
3° Use a very low reluctance (high permeability) core for the secondary.
4° The more the difference reluctance between Outer and inner core is, the more power you can extract.
5° A theory about the reversing polarity of a saturated metal (the two field helping each other instead fighting each other)
6° Good work and good luck !!!
7° Pray for Japan...
Yeah, three msgs in a row...
I have a M-116 core (160 OD * 130 ID * 30 H millimeters), I want to replicate and test...
If anyone can tell me where I can find steel donuts that can fit these dimensions above... ?
One more question it's stainless steel or (which is non magnetic, permeability µ = 1.1) or ordinary steel... ?
Thanks in advance !
I know of two reasonable options:
(1) Go to an auto muffler shop for a donut, and glue the two halves together.
(2) Instead of getting a toroidal shape for the enclosure, you can make your "surround" out of flat steel. Bend two steel strips into "rings", weld flat "tops" on an end of each one, and glue the two parts together to make a cylinder.
Be sure to check out the detailed spreadsheet in the Yahoo group. It's got a lot of good information there.
OK thank you !!! :)
Ok, so what's up? Did you finely tune it and are attempting a patent (which the gov and big business wont let ya; but ya can try); or are you still trying to replicate your work? Get it tuned? This thread was hot.
I was playing around with small ferrite ring and iron nail. Some turns in iron nail (lets call this L1), sticked that through ferrite ring that had turns all around so it was toroidal coil (L2). So toroid and iron nail coils were perpendicular. I put 50 Hz AC through iron nail and there was voltage in toroidal coil. Not much because of low number of turns but voltage is voltage.
Next I wound coil in the ferrite ring around it so that this coil (L3) was in same direction as the coil in iron nail and also perpendicular to L2. This coil also showed voltage. When I shorted toroidal coil L2 voltage in L3 did not change and vice versa. Then I put 50 Hz AC going though L3 and now there was voltage in L2 and in L1. Same thing again when shorting L2 and L1, no effect on each other.
Now what is happening in the little ferrite ring ? It gets magnetic field from the primary and flux wants to go in circles. As it does this the flux goes through the secondary windings and generates voltage there. This then creates flux in the reverse direction according to Lenz law. But quess what ? Primary does not care because the flux does not cross it and no back EMF gets to primary.
Well, this is my speculation anyway. So Shubert, would you be willing to do a simple test ? When you have your toroid ready (and waiting for that steel donut to arrive), wound coil around it as just described and use that as primary. Is there any voltage in toroidal coil ?
If there is voltage, can you get any power from it and if so does it affect your source in any way ? Another test could be to put a rod with a coil inside the toroid and see if there comes any voltage.
Now lets assume this works as it did for me (unless I was having measurement trouble). How could you keep the primary running so that it does not need to use that toaster ? I am thinking about capacitor in parallel with the primary coil. If selected so that LC combination would block 50/60 Hz signal then toaster is history. If the secondary then can take load from this magnetic field so that it does not affect LC of primary then there would be close to zero power usage in primary. With perpendicular coils this should be possible. Actually I have seen some pictures in Tesla patents that used perpendicular coils, realised that after I did my adhoc testing round.
Easiest way to make this AC filter work is to use a light bulb after primary coil and capacitor. Change capacitance until light goes dim and there you have your AC filter.
Lets further assume that it is possible to make such filter, then put same kind of filter in the secondary in series (C needs to be different of course, same kind of tuning procedure could be done here). It should boost the output even more, this is well explained in Utkin paper that I have been reading recently.
Just google 'Utkin Tesla' to find it, it contains all you need to know about how to build stuff that deals with back EMF problem and it is well worth reading. It shows many ways how to make energy 'out of thin air'. There are difficult ways and there are easy ways. We just need to select one, for a beginning a transformer anyone can build would be a good starting point.
First, in your setup it looks like the BITT (Frolov Transformer) setup, not the Tesla device/Gabriel device, for more explanation you can read the BITT topic, but I think the Tesla/Gabriel version is far more efficient because you have magnetic diode: Flux primary go to secondary but flux of secondary remain in the inner core, then one way flux transfer...
I have found a steel donut on Ebay but the auction is not ended... So the product is in America and I live in France, so the first test would be in several weeks only... (I hope the donut is cut in half and not soldered together... I don't know how these stuff are sold...)
If your ampere turns is correct, then no saturation of L1 or the inner core, capacitor is not needed only if you want to correct the PF of your trafos...
So I have a power amp, so the ampere turn stuff is not a problem for me.
Economically and industrially, the Tesla device is more profitable to produce since you need two windings instead of three, and the you can use actual winding machine... The one drawback is the high permeability of the inner core price...
I did not explain things too well. You don't need to use anything inside toroid, I just described what I tested.
What I am after is not BITT type of transformer. You would just skip the donut part and instead of second toroidal coil you would and wind coil around toroid perpendicular to secondary directly on top of it. Actually it would be easier and cheaper as a product if it would work.
I am not saying it works but it would make an interesting experiment while you wait for that steel donut. And as an additional test, rods inside donut might also be usefull if they get voltage induced. Again not saying it works but if you got the toys then why not play with them.
I recall that Mav said those donut part arced once and they should be insulated. Would it be possible to take voltage out of that steel donut directly ?
OK, sorry, I haven't understood, two winding perpendicular without shield, I see two problem here when two are perpendicular, the magnetic field of the primary doesn't interfere with secondary (see law of induction)and you need shield to produce the magnetic diode when winding are wind with the same angle...
If I have the time I'll test with nail or a steel rod inside the nanoperm toroid to see if it induce something...
QuoteI recall that Mav said those donut part arced once and they should be insulated. Would it be possible to take voltage out of that steel donut directly ?
I haven't see this but curious that the shield was arcing, the shield is equivalent to one shorted turn (eddy current) so the voltage is generally low but amperage high (this why we use insulated lamination to avoid this).
Maybe rather the secondary leads was arcing, you can get beautiful arc with only 120 VAC, I have already shorted a 230/120VAC isolation trafo then beautiful spark, so no need 10 Kilovolts to make arc...
I thought too that there should be no effect because of perpendicular windings, thats what the text book says. I just happened to have coil ready on the ferrite ring and was too lazy to unwound it. My original purpose was to see if iron nail could produce voltage in the coil outside the ring. Well it did but to my amazement there was also voltage in the toroidal coil and it had much higher value.
Maybe circular form of the ring has something to with this. If it were solid and windings crossed then there would be nothing.
Now imagine if this was really happening, you could then perhaps put those two coils in series and then connect them to capacitor. Now charge the capacitor to 220 V. Current in the outer coil would then induce more voltage in the toroidal coil because it creates flux that goes in loop inside the ring. Voltage that is induced in toroidal coil creates also flux but this would not oppose outer coil because outer coil is not perpendicular to this flux. So energy in the system would increase if windings are in correct direction. Would the thing then run by itself ?
If would also be interesting to test with a capacitor between two coils that are in series and then one capacitor in parallel with the whole system. Capacitors should be of same value so that there would be parallel and series resonance effect at the same time.
If energy increases then system would blow up so you need a safety spark gap.
This Utkin paper had an example of a transformer that had coil in ferrite loop that was put between two metal plates. Plates were connected to the ends of coil. When coil is wound in correct direction there occurs energy creation, if it is wrong way there occurs energy destruction. Now this steel donut could form a capacitor in Gabby, it would be usefull if someone would test also this option. This type of transformer was invented by a 7th year student in some school in Moscow back in 1992.
I value very much what you have to say, however.. I am confused when you say, "could produce voltage in the coil outside the ring." and i cannot visualize what you are describing. To what ring are you referring to?
The core?
OR, is it the shell?
I like your idea.
~Clarification would be highly appreciated. Also, do you know what patent the moscow student has, if any, or the name of the device?
Quote from: friendenergy on June 14, 2011, 10:16:24 AM
Ok, so what's up? Did you finely tune it and are attempting a patent (which the gov and big business wont let ya; but ya can try); or are you still trying to replicate your work? Get it tuned? This thread was hot.
I love pessimistic people makes my job look easy
Ive gotten things where I want them and have independent replication of it thats all I need :)
Mav,
Good to see you back! A lot of banter, no substance since you last posted so can I ask if you'll share some of your testing? I've had to wait on the nanoperm. Opted to go for a long overdue fishing trip, this weekend, on the deep blue first. No deep pockets here and had to save up. Freezer has been empty for too long (lol) and I'm dying for fresh Mahi Mahi, Tuna, Grouper and whatever else I'm lucky enough to catch.
Then I can come back and get a fresh start by ordering the torroid. I must admit I was hoping someone would come up with a more reasonably priced replacement or source but that doesn't seem to be happening. Do have the steel donought and plenty of magnet wire in the desired AWG range though.
Post what you can or PM me on results. Either way, good to see you back.
QuoteA lot of banter, no substance since you last posted so can I ask if you'll share some of your testing?
Did you mean posting theories, post mathematical formulas (just the most important to avoid a fire in your home...), propose a protocol and a scientific view, studies the Nicola Tesla patent 120 years ago which the Gabriel device look like a clone is purely BS ?! :o
The absence of working FE device and working replication is effectively the absence of solid background theories and scientific method, sorry to be rude but I don't understand here... ???
Quote from: SchubertReijiMaigo on June 16, 2011, 06:45:54 PM
Did you mean posting theories, post mathematical formulas (just the most important to avoid a fire in your home...), propose a protocol and a scientific view, studies the Nicola Tesla patent 120 years ago which the Gabriel device look like a clone is purely BS ?! :o
The absence of working FE device and working replication is effectively the absence of solid background theories and scientific method, sorry to be rude but I don't understand here... ???
Wow I look at this and just say wow, Lets look at this
Did you mean posting theories, post mathematical formulasYou don't know whats going on and some of those math calcs won't help you untill you get your hands dirty. I had some one trying to help that had every known formula, cross section, idea at his disposal and as it turns out stuff doesn't really help.
propose a protocol and a scientific view,I don't care ? do what you want im already leagues ahead at this point
the Nicola Tesla patent 120 years ago which the Gabriel device look like a clone is purely BS ?!The Tesla patent was not known to me when I built the device and if Tesla had a FE device then we would be using now right? then why not and why didn't anyone else try it till I did it, not saying Tesla wasn't right but in 120 years don't you think that what was done is kinda revolutionary since the a magnetic diode effect which wasn't described in Tesla patent is actually present here because of something I did. So no it may look like it but when you add tech to something it is no longer that thing in which is described.
Its kinda like a beaver in a pool god says what would you look like if I gave you a bill, well now thats a duck billed platypus not a beaver.
The absence of working FE device and working replication is effectively the absence of solid background theories and scientific method, sorry to be rude but I don't understand here... ???Just because people arn't posting it online for you to see with your own eyes doesn't mean that it hasn't been done nor do I care. It works someone else other than myself has gotten it to work actually a few people to tell the truth. So banter away....
Mav
Quote from: casman1969 on June 16, 2011, 05:29:36 PM
Mav,
Good to see you back! A lot of banter, no substance since you last posted so can I ask if you'll share some of your testing? I've had to wait on the nanoperm. Opted to go for a long overdue fishing trip, this weekend, on the deep blue first. No deep pockets here and had to save up. Freezer has been empty for too long (lol) and I'm dying for fresh Mahi Mahi, Tuna, Grouper and whatever else I'm lucky enough to catch.
Then I can come back and get a fresh start by ordering the torroid. I must admit I was hoping someone would come up with a more reasonably priced replacement or source but that doesn't seem to be happening. Do have the steel donought and plenty of magnet wire in the desired AWG range though.
Post what you can or PM me on results. Either way, good to see you back.
Cas the variac helped alot and eliminated alot of things in the mix, Since then ive been working with Thane and we decided to keep quite to whats happening and how its working untill we get a provisional in. Then we still have alot of work todo.
Currently Im making smaller ones about 5 inchs in diameter with some other substances to see if I can get the same results as well we are moving in the right direction I wish you luck in your replication, unfortunately since my chat with Thane your gonna have to work off of what I put out there and I can't give anymore information so we can build a good IP for the device.
Hope you fill your chest with plenty of Feesh :)
Mave
This cracks me up. That people come on here tell a little about their device just to get attention and then hide back in the greed arena. I mean come on this is open source site. Why did you ever post anything here if you are going to get greedy and actually think the gov and big oil business is going to let you come in and make a billion dollars...hahah...So funny. Don't feel bad it's human nature to be greedy and hope to be rich right away...but for future generations....it's not a great idea...unless you actually think this is the time they will listen and let you release something that can put them and millions of dollars a day out of business... Good luck and wish you and your family the best...But if they come knocking, run and open source again (but it will be too late)......lol...this is some funny stuff.
Quote from: friendenergy on June 16, 2011, 09:36:16 PM
This cracks me up. That people come on here tell a little about their device just to get attention and then hide back in the greed arena. I mean come on this is open source site. Why did you ever post anything here if you are going to get greedy and actually think the gov and big oil business is going to let you come in and make a billion dollars...hahah...So funny. Don't feel bad it's human nature to be greedy and hope to be rich right away...but for future generations....it's not a great idea...unless you actually think this is the time they will listen and let you release something that can put them and millions of dollars a day out of business... Good luck and wish you and your family the best...But if they come knocking, run and open source again (but it will be too late)......lol...this is some funny stuff.
Well actually Mavendex was invited here by someone on overunity after they saw something on his device on peswiki IIRC. But I would agree that if this is real OU then getting a patent is the worst of ideas. A review at Panacea will give you a whole lot of reasons why: http://www.panacea-bocaf.org/energysuppression.htm And that's not even the best summary I've seen but it covers quite a bit.
Well, Mav has told us a while ago about patenting this.
Mav, Have you read the SAWS document from the US pat office? I would have to say that this route is the way most get suppressed. Heck, if Agenda 21 goes through, soon someday none of us will be able to own our own land let alone be rich or even middle class from inventions.
But anyway, Mav wasnt the only one building this. Where is everyone else? Doing the same thing?
I would build it, but I have too many things going on, on the bench at this time. But I do plan on it being a near future project, as it seems we have some confirmation that it works, to what ever extent.
If anyone does go for it, maybe be sure you have the mindset to work out the issues. Once someone does lay it all out for replication, then all the figuring is done and most anyone can have at it.
It will be possibly at least a year before a provisional pat is granted, if it ever is. I did one of these about 9 years ago. Cost $75 and covered for a year. Back then was just some months to get finalized and receive my pat. If you have submitted the application but is not yet granted, you can say Pat Pending. But that does not mean much till it is granted.
So there is plenty of time for someone with skills to get one going to a reasonable level and bust it out in this thread. Im not really sweating it. I am at the point that I KNOW trying to pat is a dead end street.
So dont fret. Build it if you can, and just be careful. This is not a pulse motor. ;]
I have had thoughts of different geometry. Ive said it before, but with the wrong ingredients. The idea was to use a rod core with a pipe shell, and caps on the end to connect the core to the outer pipe shell. But the pipe would have eddy's. So my way can be done using ferro poxy. Make the core, shell and caps with it. I am getting stuff for this next week for my present project and will have plenty to work with.
Will need to make tube molds and such. The inner core will be more massive than the outer shell as to draw the primary flux in, and help keep the secondary flux in.
Mav, thanks for sharing and putting in a heck of a lot of work. ;] Good luck. ;]
Mags
Come to think about it, I believe the Tesla pat IS this device. Either someone owns the Tesla pat, or, as many have seen it, is it open source? If no one owns it, is it for sale? Im not sure on those things, but the thoughts come to mind.
One reason Im looking toward another geometry is ease of a rewind. Just open the cap of the tube and remove the inner core for rewind. And the primary is just wound on the outside of the tube, so thats simple. Im just getting burnt out on toroid winding and rewinding. lol.
My plexi source has many sizes of tube to make molds for the core materials. Then wax polish wax polish wax polish, and PVA spray and pour the mold. I read that epoxy with ferro powder is used to glue ferrite transformers together in order to make a good magnetic connection between parts. So maybe just some ferro fluid in the joints during testing and development for ease of disassembly, and no leaks. JB weld is magnetic, but not near what is good for us, but more metal can be added. Mu strips? ;] Do they make Mu powder? ;]
Anyway, those are my plans for approaching this one. Ive had a a lot of time to think about it. It just seems more logical. 1 core that encompasses the sec and wind the primary on the outside. I am willing to rewind that many many times. Pri or sec. ;]
I see the toaster or any other device as a crutch. There has to be a way to make it straight up. If a limiter is needed, then the design is not set up for 120v in, or 220v, where ever you may be. ;]
Im thinking that it is not that we need more winds on the primary to match the input voltage, but thinner wire, maybe only 1 or 2 sizes, maybe, while the sec needs larger current carrying abilities, and toss the toaster. ;]
Mags
@AmericanMan31,
Simply put, I am asking for a verification I stumpled into by accident. If you have this bigger nanoperm toroid, just wound a toroidal coil on it. Then instead of using steel shell and another toroidal coil on top of it, you wound your primary on the outside of toroid so you got perpendicular coils. Use as much wire as you can to get high flux in nanoperm core. Next you connect your toaster/whatever on this primary. What happens in secondary ?
If there is usable power then some more tests could be done. One test could be to connect these two coils like this and see if it runs by itself:
primary coil C2 toroidal coil
--- ***********---||---*************----
| |
| C1 |
|--------------------||------------------------
I am quessing with C2, it could work without it, or could be that this does not work at all. I am asking for experimentation as I am unable to test this myself, just thinking about different ideas here.
Another test could be to use a 50/60 Hz filter using a capacitor in parallel with the primary coil.
secondary coil
***********
-----------
-----------
--- ***********------
| primary coil |
| |
| 50 Hz filter, C |
---|---------||---------------- L wire
|
R/fuse/lamp
|
------------------------------- N wire
When you connect primary with this filter on through your toaster/lamp or even short it (via small fuse) with N wire/ground, there is little or no current going out. But there would be magnetic field fluctuation in its all force (how big force, would it still depend on current going out ?) between this capacitor and coil. And if you can now tap into this fluctuation without affecting it then you can get all the power nanoperm core can give you at close to zero power usage in the primary. Again, I don't know if this works or not but it sounds simple enough to test it. For 50 Hz filter you would need for example L of 10.132 mH and C of 1000uF, but off course L comes from your primary and C needs to be tuned with that.
When I trashed one chinese AC/AC trafo there was a setup inside it that behaved just like this, capacitor was in series though. No switches, primary was always connected to mains. This is why those trafos get warm even if it does not power anything. When you connect something in the secondary this blocking condition is no more, lights go on but also meter starts to run.
I learned about this student from here: http://www.scribd.com/doc/55235866/Vladimir-Utkin-Free-Energy-1
It has good info about transformers too, actually it shows methods how to make asymmetric transformer, no back-EMF problems. There is also switchable induction that can be used to make a self runner. Yesterday I found his russian site and going through that now, 90+ chapters worth of information: http://ut27972.narod.ru/Book_2/00_Book_2_head.htm. Dont understand russian but luckily google does. Maybe there is an english site but haven't found it yet.
Quotethe Nicola Tesla patent 120 years ago which the Gabriel device look like a clone is purely BS ?!
The Tesla patent was not known to me when I built the device and if Tesla had a FE device then we would be using now right? then why not and why didn't anyone else try it till I did it, not saying Tesla wasn't right but in 120 years don't you think that what was done is kinda revolutionary since the a magnetic diode effect which wasn't described in Tesla patent is actually present here because of something I did. So no it may look like it but when you add tech to something it is no longer that thing in which is described.
Its kinda like a beaver in a pool god says what would you look like if I gave you a bill, well now thats a duck billed platypus not a beaver.
OK, sorry but did you read my previous post (About Tesla/Gabriel Device analogy) ? Why Tesla did not mention FE (What about, when he said: "a constant current at all load" ) generally in trafo when you put a load the current is not the same, no ?
Why we don't use it now, energy suppression, ask this at Rockefeller or Rotschild family LOL, try to sell your device in the market and tell me what the news after... (Have you hear about RomeroUK/Muller replication) he have posted a video and some info, after this he has literally disappeared...)
Tesla did not mention FE principle clearly, why ? Try to put a patent mentioning, overunity, free energy or perpetual motion, tell me the news after...
Sorry but for me, these two devices are two clone, adding some nanoperm core don't add some new "tech".
What I see: A primary, a shield, a secondary, an inner core... Phase difference and constant current at all load (FE) by proportioning different element like Tesla said, this what you have done, thank you for rediscovering this and your brillant work, but something new, I'am skeptic here...
Finally it's a good thing this technology is public domain, so no patent, no monopol and no suppression, and no money game again...
And the formulas stuff your device use some main stream science "effect", so formula can be an help, I hope I don't teach you something here, but you must use toaster ? Because you have not the correct ampere turns in your primary the whole device is saturated, and the voltage will be very low at the primary side (See ohm law... yeah again a "law"), I proposed to replace the toaster by a AC line reactor to avoid wasting energy (I suppose you know reactive load not consume energy... and it exist a formula again to determine the correct inductance value...) in the toaster, no one was responding about this...
So for now I think this is better to make my own research alone...
Regards,
Schubert.
Quote from: SchubertReijiMaigo on June 17, 2011, 05:06:39 AM
OK, sorry but did you read my previous post (About Tesla/Gabriel Device analogy) ? Why Tesla did not mention FE (What about, when he said: "a constant current at all load" ) generally in trafo when you put a load the current is not the same, no ?
Why we don't use it now, energy suppression, ask this at Rockefeller or Rotschild family LOL, try to sell your device in the market and tell me what the news after... (Have you hear about RomeroUK/Muller replication) he have posted a video and some info, after this he has literally disappeared...)
Tesla did not mention FE principle clearly, why ? Try to put a patent mentioning, overunity, free energy or perpetual motion, tell me the news after...
Sorry but for me, these two devices are two clone, adding some nanoperm core don't add some new "tech".
What I see: A primary, a shield, a secondary, an inner core... Phase difference and constant current at all load (FE) by proportioning different element like Tesla said, this what you have done, thank you for rediscovering this and your brillant work, but something new, I'am skeptic here...
Finally it's a good thing this technology is public domain, so no patent, no monopol and no suppression, and no money game again...
And the formulas stuff your device use some main stream science "effect", so formula can be an help, I hope I don't teach you something here, but you must use toaster ? Because you have not the correct ampere turns in your primary the whole device is saturated, and the voltage will be very low at the primary side (See ohm law... yeah again a "law"), I proposed to replace the toaster by a AC line reactor to avoid wasting energy (I suppose you know reactive load not consume energy... and it exist a formula again to determine the correct inductance value...) in the toaster, no one was responding about this...
So for now I think this is better to make my own research alone...
Regards,
Schubert.
It seems odd to me that we couldnt build it to match direct wall currents. And I see many ideas. Maybe 2 devices with their primaries in series?
It still boils down to design to me. This is why I am choosing to change the geometry of the core, cuz I know I will have to wind and rewind again and again. ::)
Anyway, we are all free to try. Im going to work with smaller devices. Power in and out is what its all about.
Im going to look at some premade rod cores for the central core first and epoxy core for shell and caps.
Mags
Also there are many articles and interviews with Tesla that incline that tesla was all about free energy and claimed he had it.
Lets just say that he was very particular with the wording of his patents. ;] Most back then probably could not comprehend these ideas in his patents, let alone today. But some do. He was a tiny bit cryptic, but wanted to protect the idea some how. And if we read close enough with a bit of imagination, there is a lot of good info there. ;]
Mags
@Mag I like the rod/ enclosed pipe idea you have. If you can get the right materials I think that would be an easier prototype and remod if you need too.
Well, if a patent is given then good and I wish the best for the inventor. I actually think I would be tempted too if I came up with an idea that was worthy. But honestly I don't think a patent for free energy device will be given. I think once free energy is open source then I do think it will be possible to patent anti-gravity, force fields, cloaking type stuff cause the cat will be out of the bag so to speak. Any way I am thankful for the info that has been shared thus far, didn't mean to get pissy...lol.
QuoteAnyway, we are all free to try. Im going to work with smaller devices. Power in and out is what its all about.
Yeah, I'm taking this direction also, to reduce power match the ampere turns Frequency/voltage and excite it like a normal transformer to see what happen.
Unfortunately nothing before several week, I have found a donut but these things are sold the two half glued together, and the bad thing I have no idea how separate them...
QuoteAlso there are many articles and interviews with Tesla that incline that Tesla was all about free energy and claimed he had it.
Lets just say that he was very particular with the wording of his patents. ;] Most back then probably could not comprehend these ideas in his patents, let alone today. But some do. He was a tiny bit cryptic, but wanted to protect the idea some how. And if we read close enough with a bit of imagination, there is a lot of good info there. ;]
+1 I have already read some patent, even today certain concept and words to describe his stuff are kinda weird, some "legend" tell that Tesla invented this not for his time but for it's "children's time" into the future, 100 years after (our today time...), I'm not turning Tesla into some God or anything but just saying this guy is not common anymore...
Mav,
Thanks for the response and won't press as I completely understand and would expect anyone here to do the same. It's encouraging to read your post and will catch up when I return next week. Hope you can get that Pat. App. in and approved before too long. We both know how long that takes but the mere fact you're going that route speaks volumes. I do hope congrats are in order.
Just one generic question...
Are you satisfied with the results of testing on the original specs.? I ask to make sure I'm pursuing the same line.
I have constructed and completed the first version of my Bismuth Bi-nested toroid, and, pictures can be seen here over at the yahoo groups Gabriel_OS Gabriel Device. Today I start testing the output while using an input of a small plugin trasfo 12 volts 600mA ....we shall see whats happens, but Likely MORE power current from a larger trasfo is needed. I the meantime...enjoy! http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Gabriel_OS/photos/album/0/list
More pictures of molding the bismuth "tiny" toroid
Using a file to grind away the dross of the moulded bismuth on the sides took some time. I plan to crack open the shell "bismuth" and make the clay insulation smaller so that the bismuth is closer to the secondary...I'll do that tomorrow and post some pics soon. Note: because of the thickness of the clay/bismuth I was only able to get 12 windings of primary on the bismuth :( Next casting should be better....I hope! the nanoperm measured 1.25 inch, was wrapped with 25 feet of AWG #22 wire and covered with clay bought from a craft store for $6.99, and Bismuth was chisled off a 2 pound ingot I bought for $50.00 from e-bay. Be sure and see more pictures over at yahoo groups!
Nice........Now that is a true experimenter...lol. Good job keep it up.
Does anyone have experience working with molten metal..? I have been trying something but am "stuck". The problem I am having is that when I try and just "dip" the clay torus into the bismuth (molten) it reacts sort of allophobic, and well, none of the molten bismuth wants to stick to the clay. Argh! I have too much surface tension, I guess??
Does anybody have an answer to this dilemma?
Any input is appreciated. :)
If you don't have an answer yet to metal casting info....
Perhaps the easiest method to get cast metal would be to use sand casting. You have to have a "reverse mold" form (i.e., the way you want the object to look), then you press it into a box of clean, slightly damp sand. (I think they use water, but I don't remember; I did some sand casting in Jr. High, back when they still had shop classes in schools 40+ years ago.) The damp sand holds the shape of the object. You then carefully pour the molten metal into the mould (you don't want to destroy the shape). If it doesn't turn out quite right, you can melt it down and try again. You should probably do some more research to get the method exactly right, but this is the jist of it.
Hope this helps.
Just browsing through it, that it was kind of interesting
Electromagnetic Biostimulation of Living Cultures for Biotechnology, Biofuel and Bioenergy Applications
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2790121/ (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2790121/)
Has anyone a list of the reluctance of different materials?
Quote from: Magnethos on July 09, 2011, 07:25:27 PM
Has anyone a list of the reluctance of different materials?
It is easier to find the permeability of materials (and to be aware of the reciprocal relationship between reluctance and permeability, at unity material length and cross section). So the lower the magnetic permeability of a material, the higher its reluctance i.e. the less readily it conducts magnetic flux.
see the charts in the these links on permeability
http://www.microwaves101.com/encyclopedia/magneticmaterials.cfm
http://www.coilgun.info/theorymath/home.htm
Quote from: gyulasun on July 10, 2011, 06:29:45 AM
It is easier to find the permeability of materials (and to be aware of the reciprocal relationship between reluctance and permeability, at unity material length and cross section). So the lower the magnetic permeability of a material, the higher its reluctance i.e. the less readily it conducts magnetic flux.
see the charts in the these links on permeability
http://www.microwaves101.com/encyclopedia/magneticmaterials.cfm
http://www.coilgun.info/theorymath/home.htm
Thanks for the links,
So, the high the reluctance, the lower it conducts magnetic flux. Copper has a very low permeability, so if we use copper as the material in a transformer's core, then... nothing or almost no magnetic flux would flow?
I don't know what kind of material Thane Heins uses in the primary core, but I read that only reactive current (scalar) can flow in the primary core since it has a high reluctance.
But in classical theory... is almost imposible to make a transformer using copper as the core?
Another question I have is about the magnetic reluctances, I think that if you try to power a device using back-emf, you can get COP>1 if you energize a first coil with a high reluctance core and then you collect the back emf in a secondary coil containing a high permeability core. The collapsinng field would produce more energy in the high perm. core that the energy nedded to produce the magnetic field in the primary core. I think I read something about this sometime ago.
Quote from: Magnethos on July 10, 2011, 08:59:26 AM
...
Copper has a very low permeability, so if we use copper as the material in a transformer's core, then... nothing or almost no magnetic flux would flow?
Yes I think so. More precisely, it would behave as if it had an air core. However, depending on the volume or sizes of a copper core, magnetic flux may induce eddy currents in it and a kind of counter flux would manifest. Think of normal laminated transformer cores: they were introduced just for minimizing eddy currents.
Quote
But in classical theory... is almost imposible to make a transformer using copper as the core?
I believe it would be pointless to use copper core even if you were using laminated copper sheets, it would have no useful effect compared to the same transformer when you removed the copper core and check the performance.
(Of course there are air core transformers designed for higher frequencies with acceptable efficiency.)
Quote
Another question I have is about the magnetic reluctances, I think that if you try to power a device using back-emf, you can get COP>1 if you energize a first coil with a high reluctance core and then you collect the back emf in a secondary coil containing a high permeability core. The collapsinng field would produce more energy in the high perm. core that the energy nedded to produce the magnetic field in the primary core. I think I read something about this sometime ago.
Well, my question would be: how could you mechanically arrange the two coils with their differing permeability cores to achieve that the input current's magnetic field in the first coil should not 'see' the other core, then the collapsing field of this first coil should immediatly 'see' the other core?
Hello again, Copper and Bismuth are diamgnetic, what does that mean ?
Diamagnetic repel magnetic field, superconductors are perfect diamagnetic u=0...
I don't think diamagnetic is a good choice for this app, but fully saturated ferromagnetic screen like Tesla said would be better...
My father see to cut the mild steel toroid with dremel, if everything is OK test will start next week...
Diamagnetic materials has a permeability of less than 1. How less?
Vacuum has a permeability, u=1.0 and air has u=1.0000004
Copper u=0.999991
Bismuth u=0.99983
So the difference is very very small with respect to the air. It involves very strong magnetic fields to experience a small difference.
OK, so the with small value of B, Copper and Bismuth look like air...
I wonder what kind of effect we can have here, maybe a normal trafo, since if the outer/primary is wind through air or something like air, you have a conventional trafo, this is why I'am a little skeptic here, but I wait for your tests before concluding anything.
I assembled Teslas construction to see if it would work I could not get power to transfer in either direction, dropping 2kw in and 0 volts out.
Permeability is key in the construction teslas iron version must have been enormous, but just goes to show you that mabye it wasn't actually constructed but just conceptualized.
In this construction is a Steel shell constructed, a iron powdered core, electrically isolated, and wire the perm of the outershell probably 100 or so the inner core had a perm. of around 68.
Good work, it looks like permeability gradient is necessary like the Heins effect, my replication version is like your first, with a nanoperm core (u=30000), and waiting the shield, the permeability of fully saturated metal (for the outer core) is 1 no ? This is a 100 buck question here !!!
I have read somewere the reluctance ratio between the two material must be at least 10000 to obtain a powerful Heins effect !!!
Edit: Or maybe the primary inductance is too low (due to the low permeability of inner core) the voltage cannot build up...
You have put the 120 VAC and a ballast like first version ?
No I found if you use low volts and higher amps like 5-10 volts in and 10 amps you will get a good return.
although your outer windings should employ a low ohmic value to get that anywhere from .3-.5 so a low gauge of wire in the 12-9 area to get the amount of turns needed should get you where you want to be.
If we have a 30k perm innercore it would be a good forthought to try and make a shell out of silicon transformer steel because its permeability is in the 4k range, this should allow for higher conduction of the magnetic field to the inner windings and charge the innercore up.
at least thats my guess, I have a silicon steel transformer shell in the works but will take some time to get it finished unfortunately.
Thanks for responce, I can't tell you anything for this time since I have not tested in reality, but I have prepared a protocol to test different situation with this version. I have an intuition: you maybe have right about low volts an high amps: I have tested some saturated transformer, no FE of course but strange thing like when you put a load, input current decrease, and if you add more load: input current will rise again... (The measurement was made with a bulb in serie to the primary, crude of course but give some preview of what's happening.)
Unfortunately I have not lamination to test your idea, but mild steel toroid I have bought on Ebay.
I have no idea how much u have this thing...
So when test will be done (successful or not) everything will be published here (protocols, formulas, etc, etc) but at this present time this just speculation and idea of my part.
Good luck.
I would suspect that the transformer operating in saturated mode would act as a magnetic capacitor, this would be the reason why the amp draw would decrease then increase,
Example the load would decrease overall input due to the fact that the saturated metal is already at capacity and that would get transfered in to the load, then you add more load the capacitor has been depleted and then requests more energy from the input.
Here is much the same thing only we have a secondary core to deal with that is feeding the intial process. as we increase load on the transformer we would essentially have the same "Heins effect", thicker shells would infact give us more domains to saturate and thus give us a better capacitor that we could then deplete more until it more energy is requested.
The nice thing about that theory is we wouldn't necessarily need more energy to saturate the core but we would have more to draw off of because of increased domains in the shell.
Hello again,
QuoteI would suspect that the transformer operating in saturated mode would act as a magnetic capacitor, this would be the reason why the amp draw would decrease then increase,
I don't know, as far I know a saturated trafo create a lot of harmonics in the network, typically harmonics 3 (due to the non linear region of the BH curve...)
But yes energy is stored in form of (reactive) current with those harmonics and phase lag voltage/current is 90° PF=0.
QuoteHere is much the same thing only we have a secondary core to deal with that is feeding the intial process. as we increase load on the transformer we would essentially have the same "Heins effect", thicker shells would infact give us more domains to saturate and thus give us a better capacitor that we could then deplete more until it more energy is requested.
I have nearly same speculation about this: we must saturate the inner and outer core to create VARS with harmonics, and when you put load the VARS decrease in proportion with the real power consumed at secondary, ie if with no load you have 10 amps at 120 VAC you can extract freely 10 amps at 120 VAC (assuming 1:1 turns ratio) if you want more energy we must saturate more the inner core to create more extractable VARS...
For the shell I think this is the contrary, a thinner screen to saturate it easily but also the inner to create VARS like above.
We have roughly a VARS to WATTS converter...
And it is less related to the Heins effect in this case...
So just a theory about this test will be needed to confirm or infirm this of course !!!
Last thing in your experiment you have no flux transfer in either direction, I have thought about this last night: your shell is very thick and maybe the flux will not saturate the shell and cannot magnetize the inner core ?
Just my 2 cents.
I was thinking that as well but the Tesla version shell is the same gauge of steel maybe a smidge thicker and wouldn't go I added more turns and still nothing, Ive ran into this before and I really think its a permeability issue either in the inner core or outer core or both.
The 30ku core will show us alot of information, I really think if the Tesla version was built it must have been enormous possibly 2ft. which is Teslas day would have been a small transformer I'm sure hehe.
I understand better now, since you can (in the Tesla version) have a huge huge inner core with same permability that the outer...
Heins effect is basically a reluctance difference between two circuits, well OK.
You can act on reluctance not only with permeability but also with the magnetic path length, the section S, so you can have two same materials but with totally different reluctance since you can play with other variable !!!
This is what I understand you better now when you tell the Tesla version must be very very huge and heavy also !!!
But with nanoperm you have ameliorated the effect by reducing size and weight and increasing the reluctance gradient !!!
I have watched some B-H curve and when a metal (no matter initial permeability) is fully saturated like the screen, the permeability is one or nearly one, the metal is like air but act like a screen also !!! So you have a huge permeability (and reluctance of course) gradient between inner and outer...
Good news !, today my father will start to cut the shell, apparently this is dangerous because the dreemel can slip, and no society (in France) can cut it with laser >:( (it's a donut like yours)...
Cheers, Schubert.
I've been following this interesting thread for some months... Two questions, please:
1. Does anyone know where Feynman is -- the fellow who started this thread? I thought he was doing good work, and I hope he is alright.
2. Has anyone heard of the following device ? It seems to have some similarities with the Gabriel device.I've been working on alt-energy for years, and in particular, the device below has caught my attention because of its simplicity and because of REAL TESTS demonstrated -- NOTES IN GERMAN -- NEED TRANSLATING HELP!
http://philica.com/display_observation.php?observation_id=61
Demonstration of the device to "1500 people" by H. Schnelzer; sketch of device by J. Horvath; acquired from Horvath; article in Philica by C. Turtur.
I quote from the article below, and I will attach the drawing from the written-PDF for convenience.
1. Are there any replications? Anyone?
2. Can anyone translate the German on the sketch?
3. " It is said, that the device has been inspected and certified by TÜV-München, by measuring input- and output power and temperature." -- is there any record of these tests? Can anyone help locate these tests and their results?
Quote
Proposal for a test of a motionless zero-point-energy converter
Claus W. Turturconfirmed userThis person has donated to Philica (Fachbereich Elektrotechnik, University of Applied Sciences Braunschweig-Wolfenbuettel)
Published in physic.philica.com
Observation
Abstract:
The proposal describes tapping an unknown energy-source, told to operate years ago, but not yet reproduced. The principle is unexplained. The setup came from Prof. S. Marinov of Sofia University via a colleague at Vienna University. A setup has been confirmed by the TÜV-München.
Article body:
In 1989-91 the colleague reported about investigations on a special transformator consisting of magnets and coils.
(drawing: http://www.ostfalia.de/export/sites/default/de/pws/turtur/FundE/English/MLMC2.pdf)
The hysteresis loop was passed by applying a pulsed current to the primary coil. Surprisingly, the secondary coil was said to produce more electric power than the primary coil needed, depending on the pulse-width of the primary pulses. Discussion of the reason: Inertance of magnetization due to the Barkhausen-effect might delay the decrease of the magnetic flux in the magnets.
In 1990/91 the Austrian Engineer H. Schnelzer reproduced the setup using an electric circuit supplying short 7kAmp-pulses by IGBTs, sourced from a car-accumulator. At a demonstration at Scheibbs, 1500 people saw an output power of about 2.1kW (driving a heater and a lamp) for 90 minutes, i.d. more than 3kWh. But the accumulator only had 50Ah/12V, i.e. a power-capacity of maximal 0.6kWh. Furthermore the accumulator did not discharge. It is said, that the device has been inspected and certified by TÜV-München, by measuring input- and output-power and temperature.
Important is an air gap in the yoke as well as high current IGBTs (Driving those IGBTs is today easy doable with Analog Devices ADUM5230 (2.5kV) ADUM7234 (1kV) (Isolation rating), or other Isolated-Gate Drivers). The IGBTs (4 pieces, H-bridge-circuit) of Mr. Schnelzer had a turn-on time of 1µs / ~7000A at 1000V.
Authors: Johannes Horvath, Claus Turtur
Address: University of Applied Sciences Braunschweig-Wolfenbüttel
This newest iteration of the device looks very interesting. The middle magnet appears to be off centre, that is, its like two thirds in the primary side and one third in the secondary side.
If someone is able to translate the german, would it be possible to also re-draw it more clearly along with the english wording ? Thanking you in advance.
Quote from: JouleSeeker on July 27, 2011, 02:06:20 AM
I've been following this interesting thread for some months... Two questions, please:
1. Does anyone know where Feynman is -- the fellow who started this thread? I thought he was doing good work, and I hope he is alright.
2. Has anyone heard of the following device ? It seems to have some similarities with the Gabriel device.
I've been working on alt-energy for years, and in particular, the device below has caught my attention because of its simplicity and because of REAL TESTS demonstrated -- NOTES IN GERMAN -- NEED TRANSLATING HELP!
http://philica.com/display_observation.php?observation_id=61
Demonstration of the device to "1500 people" by H. Schnelzer; sketch of device by J. Horvath; acquired from Horvath; article in Philica by C. Turtur.
I quote from the article below, and I will attach the drawing from the written-PDF for convenience.
1. Are there any replications? Anyone?
2. Can anyone translate the German on the sketch?
3. " It is said, that the device has been inspected and certified by TÜV-München, by measuring input- and output power and temperature." -- is there any record of these tests? Can anyone help locate these tests and their results?
Look up parallel path, or flux switching,. there are many different attempts using this theory.
to name afew:
Fluxite
Hildenbrand
Magnacoaster
Tom Bearden's MEG
Please start a new thread if you want to discuss this.
Thank you
Quote from: JouleSeeker on July 27, 2011, 02:06:20 AM
... 1. Are there any replications? Anyone? ...
2. Can anyone translate the German on the sketch? ...
Answer to #1:
There are U.S. Patents that anyone can look at, and they fall into the general catagory of "magnetic amplifiers", which can use transformers that look somewhat like the drawing. It's merely a question of searching the Patent database.
Answer to #2:
If I could try and accurately read the German handwritten cursive, there should be several free Internet translators avsilable, but their library of electronic technical terms may be small.
(I looked at the drawing again. I can't separate letters into any distinct word(s) by his handwriting. So, someone fluent in German can try?)
--Lee
Quote from: JouleSeeker on July 27, 2011, 02:06:20 AM
I've been following this interesting thread for some months... Two questions, please:
1. Does anyone know where Feynman is -- the fellow who started this thread? I thought he was doing good work, and I hope he is alright.
2. Has anyone heard of the following device ? It seems to have some similarities with the Gabriel device.
I've been working on alt-energy for years, and in particular, the device below has caught my attention because of its simplicity and because of REAL TESTS demonstrated -- NOTES IN GERMAN -- NEED TRANSLATING HELP!
http://philica.com/display_observation.php?observation_id=61
Demonstration of the device to "1500 people" by H. Schnelzer; sketch of device by J. Horvath; acquired from Horvath; article in Philica by C. Turtur.
I quote from the article below, and I will attach the drawing from the written-PDF for convenience.
1. Are there any replications? Anyone?
2. Can anyone translate the German on the sketch?
3. " It is said, that the device has been inspected and certified by TÜV-München, by measuring input- and output power and temperature." -- is there any record of these tests? Can anyone help locate these tests and their results?
Quote from: oscar on July 27, 2011, 11:04:29 AM
text of Horvath sketch:
left side:
Weichmagnet = soft magnet
Hartmagnet = hard magnet
Wirkungsgrad < 1 = cop < 1
A1 u. A2 sind durch den Luftstpalt bestimmt = A1 and A2 are defined by size of air gap
vx ist die Magnetisierungsgeschwindigkeit = vx is the speed of magnetization
right side:
Parameters to alter
N1,2= Number of windings
P1= primary power
P2= secondary power
U1= input voltage
U2= output voltage
d= air gap
Ø1= flux1
Ø2= flux2
A1= virtual magnetic cross section of Ø1
A2= virtual magnetic cross section of Ø2
vx= magnetization speed
ratio A1/A2 ... magnetic resonator
epsilon = ratio t1/t2
f = 1/t2
I1 = primary current
I2 = secondary current
PS: yes, a car accumulator is a car battery ('accumulator' as it accumulates charge)
I have decided to apply a modified GNU license to the application, which should protect the device and the mods that get out there, yes we won't get rich but at the same time I think we need to not worry about money at this point.
Money Comes and goes, but time is something you can never get back and is the most valuable resources any one has.
High amps low volts just like the above mentioned patent will serve you well, I've been slowly saving my piggy bank to have a new shell made out of Permalloy which will be much easier to magnetize than the mild steel, it should also separate those magnetic fields even better.
So mod away and break the chains that bind us.
Mav
Quote from: Mavendex on July 27, 2011, 03:15:10 PM
I have decided to apply a modified GNU license to the application, which should protect the device and the mods that get out there, yes we won't get rich but at the same time I think we need to not worry about money at this point.
Money Comes and goes, but time is something you can never get back and is the most valuable resources any one has.
High amps low volts just like the above mentioned patent will serve you well, I've been slowly saving my piggy bank to have a new shell made out of Permalloy which will be much easier to magnetize than the mild steel, it should also separate those magnetic fields even better.
So mod away and break the chains that bind us.
Mav
Thanks Mav for the update and good news. Please let us know of your successes. And you are right about needing something other than money - this entire world economy may soon self destruct which will leave many without power if we don't have some sanity among politicians OR some OU devices.
Thanks, Lee, Manfred and others.
There is another thread just for this "magnetic amplifier" by Horvath et al., here for those interested:
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=11256.new#new
(This is where Oscar kindly posted his translation of the German.)
Sorry to interrupt the flow. My sincere best wishes for success on the Gabriel device!
PS -- I agree with e2matrix --
QuoteThanks Mav for the update and good news. Please let us know of your successes. And you are right about needing something other than money - this entire world economy may soon self destruct which will leave many without power if we don't have some sanity among politicians OR some OU devices.
QuoteI have decided to apply a modified GNU license to the application, which should protect the device and the mods that get out there, yes we won't get rich but at the same time I think we need to not worry about money at this point.
Money Comes and goes, but time is something you can never get back and is the most valuable resources any one has.
High amps low volts just like the above mentioned patent will serve you well, I've been slowly saving my piggy bank to have a new shell made out of Permalloy which will be much easier to magnetize than the mild steel, it should also separate those magnetic fields even better.
So mod away and break the chains that bind us.
Mav
Good decision, may be if you want to make money you can sell PDF, with construction plan or inject into the grid and not make millions but maybe up to thousands dollars a month !!! And millionaire lifestyle 8) (since you doesn't pay energy anymore) you can over heat your home, your pool, power many light, PC, television, etc, etc for free, make hundreds of miles with your car for free. In long term, we are winner, because oil will skyrocket, wind and solar are inefficient and expensive, nuclear is dangerous, hydraulic is nearly already exploited so what the next ? ??? :o
Special thanks to Mav and Tesla for discovering this !!!
Good luck.
When the roles are reversed and the secondary is energized instead, is there an induced voltage in the primary?
Quote from: broli on July 29, 2011, 07:34:48 AM
When the roles are reversed and the secondary is energized instead, is there an induced voltage in the primary?
Depends on how many turns are on the shell, I have had it where I get 0 output when the secondary is energized, if I add 600 more turns I can get a few volts.
Thanks for the answer, also can I ask how or where you'll be getting your new permalloy shell from?
On the other hand 4 special toroids could do the trick, 2 for inner and outher wall and 2 identical ones to cap the top and bottom. Might get pricy consdering the size.
Quote from: broli on July 29, 2011, 02:41:52 PM
Thanks for the answer, also can I ask how or where you'll be getting your new permalloy shell from?
On the other hand 4 special toroids could do the trick, 2 for inner and outher wall and 2 identical ones to cap the top and bottom. Might get pricy consdering the size.
From the same guys who made my last shells, L&S they do a real good job, kinda slow but a real good job. You can buy plates of permalloy online in 30" by 14" pieces with varied thickness. It was actually easier to find a single plate of permalloy than a single sheet of CRGO steel, to get the electrical steel I would have to pay something like 40k for a 40,000lbs coil of it, which is something I say no to hehe, Ill just go with the really really good material that I can get by the plate.
Quote from: Feynman on March 22, 2011, 04:07:09 PM
The Gabriel Device, possible COP=8
Operation: Thane Heins effect based device.
Replication: None yet.
Closed-loop: Not attempted, can fry the windings without input current control circuitry. (i.e. inverter, battery charger , and battery)
Independent Verification: The Heins' effect has been independently verified, but Klingelhoefer's implementation has not.
Input: 120VAC at 0.5Amp
Output: 120VAC at 4Amp
You can read my comments to this in the Thane Heins thread here
Thane Heins BI-TOROID TRANSFORMER
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7833.msg278868#new
I will be attempting replication and am in contact with David Klingelhoefer. Exciting stuff.
Let's hope it's not a measurement error, but I have high hopes.
Cheers,
Feynman
Having read much, but not all, of this thread -- it appears that "high hopes" are still there.
Can someone help with a few questions --
1. What are the FUNDAMENTAL CRITICAL parts of this approach?
Nested toroids with magnetic shielding?
2. Are bifilar-windings important, or not?
3. Has anyone completed, after these months, a replication that shows OU (or not)? who? what detailed results are presented?
Thanks so much. I hope this approach succeeds!
post 454 has a pdf of in and out with ou properties that is independent from myself, no bifilar windings are not necessary, larger gauge wire on the outer shell to allow amps to flow is a key factor, the permeability difference is necessary to keep the magnetic fields separated, cold rolled steel is probably not the best material to use for the outer shell, Iron will not work, Im going for a permalloy shell for the higher perm, it will still have a big difference between inner and outer core permeability, at the same time will be much easier to charge.
Quotecold rolled steel is probably not the best material to use for the outer shell, Iron will not work, Im going for a permalloy shell for the higher perm, it will still have a big difference between inner and outer core permeability, at the same time will be much easier to charge.
I'am a little bit confused now :-\ , since we need differential permeability, if you use permalloy for outer and nanoperm for inner where is the permeability difference now ? My belief is no matter the kind of metal for outer it's permeability is one or nearly one since it's obviously completely saturated (the flux exit the outer and magnetize the inner with a phase delay), so don't you see a paradox here ? And for inner when you said high amp, we have not plenty solution: 1) must remove turns for saturating slightly the inner and draw more reactive current or 2) use a low permeability inner core (which is in contradiction with the original device) !!! :o :o
If you don't believe me look at the BH curve and the permeability curve (the S point, the metal is fully saturated permeability droop to one...) which is interdependent...
Quote from: SchubertReijiMaigo on August 01, 2011, 12:51:09 PM
I'am a little bit confused now :-\ , since we need differential permeability, if you use permalloy for outer and nanoperm for inner where is the permeability difference now ? My belief is no matter the kind of metal for outer it's permeability is one or nearly one since it's obviously completely saturated (the flux exit the outer and magnetize the inner with a phase delay), so don't you see a paradox here ? And for inner when you said high amp, we have not plenty solution: 1) must remove turns for saturating slightly the inner and draw more reactive current or 2) use a low permeability inner core (which is in contradiction with the original device) !!! :o :o
If you don't believe me look at the BH curve and the permeability curve (the S point, the metal is fully saturated permeability droop to one...) which is interdependent...
Since Im the only one trying it I don't think you should worry that much :)
and consequently, you are free to do as you wish, im not gonna sit here and debate what is right and wrong considering electromagnetic's is not something humans fully understand, its worth trying other things to see if it gets better or worse.
OK well received, I will test my own replication, but not this time because I will go vacation for one month now... I agree EM is weird, some legend tell even that original maxwell quaternion equation include FE, gravity control and time warp with EM...
Thanks for the responses and sharing and the good work, especially Mav and Mags and others. I do think that humanity will get much farther by working openly -- rather than going for patents. Ask Dr. Moray (or his son) what he thinks of patents and government inspectors!
Magluvin wrote a while back:
QuoteI have had thoughts of different geometry... The idea was to use a rod core with a pipe shell, and caps on the end to connect the core to the outer pipe shell.
I like the great simplifying factor here of a linear geometry. Not sure that "caps on the end to connect the core to the outer pipe shell" is a good idea, but worth a try with and without the caps to see which works better. And if one gets OU in any case.
Any results to share, Mags?
Hey
I havnt gotten to this yet. Been thinkin on it though.
Ive done some revamping of my project bench. Almost done.
Im still under the belief that both the primary and secondary are attracted to the larger volume of attractive, non saturated mass, inner core. And, if the primary near or saturates the shell, the sec wont see the shell as an obstacle anymore, or attractive item, just like Orbo.
Many questions. If the inner core were not in the shell, would the primary flux still be wanting or able to extend in the, umm, inner area? Or is the inner core necessary to allow the primary breach of the shell but not the sec?
Its a shame it doesnt just work. Like a common transformer config, nearly any variable gives some transformable results.
This has to be made for the purpose intended. Naturally most will try(want) to achieve a device that is plug and play(ac house currents).
I think the inner core should be of near or best quality. And if near or less, then larger(volume) cores. The shell and various winding to get it right stuff may not be so critical, or at least not impossible. ;]
If the inner core is fairly unsaturated during operation, most of the sec flux may never see the shell , let alone go beyond it. I only see it happening if the sec current is high enough to do it.
Hey Mav. Does the shell get hot? I suppose it would be hard to say if the majority of the heat from the shell is from heated windings or eddies. Even with the shells insulated from each other, I can imagine some circular currents in the shell pieces. Not saying things cant work as prescribed. Not really saying it can yet either. Its just questionable as to ifs and whys.
Im rounding up stuff for projects. 1 is peltier barrier stuff.
They seem to generate a good amount of output for their square area. Say for a solar panel. Tito had posted a few vids from yt on the subject. Seems you can build a setup that the hot side sinks capture sun heat, and the device can power a fan to cool the cold side and output power.
Picked up some cpu sinks, 2 copper thin fin, and 2 thick fin aluminum, all with their own fans.
Had this pelt chip from a car cooler for a year now and just getting to trying stuff.
Ill be around. ;]
Mags
Only when I had smaller guage wire did it heat up, and it was the wires that heated not the shell.
but obviously she is going to heat overtime.
How about using Litz wire for primary winding ? They come in many size, even over thousand strands in a single wire. Imagine that for 100 turns over steel shell, 100 000 turns. Could it crank up the impedance on the primary side so high that current limiters are no longer required ? Might be useful to use Litz wire in secondary side too.
BTW, Magnetec has new core material available, Magneperm. It has higher permability than nanoperm, highest being 450000.
Quote from: Mavendex on August 03, 2011, 08:25:07 AM
Only when I had smaller guage wire did it heat up, and it was the wires that heated not the shell.
but obviously she is going to heat overtime.
Thanks Mav -- what gauge wire did you use? (the early diagram calls for 16 AWG)
Also, about how many windings did you have on sec and on primary?
Can I ask -- HOW are you measuring input power AND output power?Thanks, Mags -- hoping you get your build going soon. Looking forward to your results. I'd like to try the cylindrical geometry you suggest also.
Should one use layered core sheets (and for the "pipe") -- to inhibit Eddy currents?
(Steven J)
I was useing 16, but the heating of the wires came in to play and so I switched to a 9 gauge to allow the amps to flow a bit better without being restricted, and it actually helped alot I could dump more amps in and use alot less voltage.
I tried a Galvanized steel pipe with a Iron stake all wrapped up and got no energy transfer out of it much like the iron cores that I also tried, Iron just won't work unless your talking in a massive scale is my personal opinion.
Hey JS
Here is the pdf I told you of.
Does anyone have the Tesla pat. no. of his transformer? ;]
Mags
Quote from: Magluvin on August 03, 2011, 01:01:26 PM
Hey JS
Here is the pdf I told you of.
Does anyone have the Tesla pat. no. of his transformer? ;]
Mags
@Mags
Did Tesla patent anything like that? Wait. He did have something that had a coil inside a toroid, I think. At the very least, there are a few patents like the .PDF that was posted.
--Lee
Quote from: Mavendex on August 03, 2011, 10:30:09 AM
I was useing 16, but the heating of the wires came in to play and so I switched to a 9 gauge to allow the amps to flow a bit better without being restricted, and it actually helped alot I could dump more amps in and use alot less voltage.
Wow, 9 gauge... How many windings (or feet) of 9 AWG did you get on the toroid? 9 gauge for both sec and primary? that's some heavy-duty wire!
QuoteI tried a Galvanized steel pipe with a Iron stake all wrapped up and got no energy transfer out of it much like the iron cores that I also tried, Iron just won't work unless your talking in a massive scale is my personal opinion.
So I take it you're saying that something like permalloy is needed -- right? what did you use, if I may ask?
Thanks, Mags -- I'm reading the .pdf with interest.
I have some thoughts on speed-of-light constraints in the "expansion" of the changing B-field also... could be quite interesting. I'll see if the .pdf gets to such relativistic effects which I find fascinating. Anyway, I'm thinking this through... lots of fun -- thanks!
Hey JS
Here is a link to the pat.
http://www.teslauniverse.com/nikola-tesla-patents-433,702-electrical-transformer (http://www.teslauniverse.com/nikola-tesla-patents-433,702-electrical-transformer)
Here is an excerpt ...
Figure 1 is a cross-section of a transformer embodying my improvement. Fig. 2 is a similar view of a modified form of transformer, showing diagrammatically the manner of using the same.
A A is the main core of the transformer, composed of a ring of soft annealed and insulated or oxidized iron wire. Upon this core is wound the secondary circuit or coil B B. This latter is then covered with a layer or layers of annealed and insulated iron wires C C, wound in a direction at right angles to said secondary coil. Over the whole is then wound the primary coil or wire D D. From the nature of this construction it will soon be obvious that as long as the shield formed by the wires C is below magnetic saturation the secondary coil or circuit is effectually protected or shielded from the inductive influence of the primary, although I would state that on open circuit it may exhibit some electro-motive force. When the strength of the primary reaches a certain value, the shield C, becoming saturated, ceases to protect the secondary from inductive action, and current is in consequence developed therein. For similar reasons, when the primary current weakens, the weakening of the secondary is retarded to the same or approximately the same extent.
Mags
Quote from: the_big_m_in_ok on August 03, 2011, 01:16:19 PM
@Mags
Did Tesla patent anything like that? Wait. He did have something that had a coil inside a toroid, I think. At the very least, there are a few patents like the .PDF that was posted.
--Lee
As I said, he had a coil inside a toroid, thusly: #433,702. GOOGLE's "Advanced Patent Search" and http://www.pat2pdf.org should allow you to download a copy if your computer has a .PDF compiler on its hard drive.
(This computer is filtered against copying text to the address bar at the top of the page.)
--Lee
Quote from: Magluvin on August 03, 2011, 10:34:52 PM
Hey JS
Here is a link to the pat.
http://www.teslauniverse.com/nikola-tesla-patents-433,702-electrical-transformer (http://www.teslauniverse.com/nikola-tesla-patents-433,702-electrical-transformer)
Here is an excerpt ...
1.A A is the main core of the transformer, composed of a ring of soft annealed and insulated or oxidized iron wire.
2. Upon this core is wound the secondary circuit or coil B B.
3. This latter is then covered with a layer or layers of annealed and insulated iron wires C C, wound in a direction at right angles to said secondary coil.
4. Over the whole is then wound the primary coil or wire D D. [snip]
Mags
Very interesting Mags, and I agree this is very much like the Gabriel design.
I find it clever to use IRON WIRE to form the toroidal core -- and also, to form the outside "donut" shell.
I had an idea -- to pass a CURRENT (could be AC) through the IRON-wire core and shell, in order to VARY the magnetic properties of these (permeability, etc.) in REAL time.[/b] Does Tesla mention such a possibility?
Anyway, I will definitely be reading the Tesla patent.
Thanks again,
Steven J
they make permalloy wire probably cheaper than sheets, mmmm take teslas idea and motivate it thru the 21st century don't use steel or iron to make the field but a better magnetic conductor.
Just a thought
Mav
Quote from: Mavendex on August 05, 2011, 03:40:21 AM
they make permalloy wire probably cheaper than sheets, mmmm take teslas idea and motivate it thru the 21st century don't use steel or iron to make the field but a better magnetic conductor.
Just a thought
Mav
That's actually a very interesting point. Just a simple search on alibaba gave numerous suppliers; http://tiny.cc/dj3j3 (http://tiny.cc/dj3j3)
That would need no machining or much hard work to spin it around the secondary or some plastic shell covering the secondary.
Quote from: broli on August 05, 2011, 04:32:28 AM
That's actually a very interesting point. Just a simple search on alibaba gave numerous suppliers; http://tiny.cc/dj3j3 (http://tiny.cc/dj3j3)
That would need no machining or much hard work to spin it around the secondary or some plastic shell covering the secondary.
Hi Broli,
Found another link you might be interested in that also mentions permalloy sheet:
http://www.espimetals.com/index.php/online-catalog/831-permalloy
I tried simulating the original Gabriel device in Ansys Maxwell, but it appears that too much input power is required to get the outer shell saturated in case of pure iron.
The example shells are simply too thick to work out a practical implementation.
Iron sheet would help out as well probably and is a bit cheaper than any permalloy material I guess.
Quote from: teslaalset on August 05, 2011, 06:24:14 AM
Found another link you might be interested in that also mentions permalloy sheet:
http://www.espimetals.com/index.php/online-catalog/831-permalloy
I tried simulating the original Gabriel device in Ansys Maxwell, but it appears that too much input power is required to get the outer shell saturated in case of pure iron.
The example shells are simply too thick to work out a practical implementation.
Iron sheet would help out as well probably and is a bit cheaper than any permalloy material I guess.
Like I said in previous posts Iron won't work. Something easier to charge would be nice, like permalloy or supermalloy, The current shells at 120 volts and 1.8 amps is as low as I could get it and still get no reflection. Now if we can do that with plain old cold rolled steel I would think those more exotic materials that are used as transformer materials in some cases would be a benefit, I don't expect anyone else to try it, and of course it will be costly but that's science :)
::wink::
Juggling a few replications this end, while getting the Modular rig Systems out the door also, but hey good to be busy!!
Well decided a couple weeks ago after speaking with Mavendex to have a go at this, so got some cores in and also some bloody thick wire, which is a bitch to wind LOL
Got some 417 and some higher permability 117's
Some photos attached.
First full Layer is on that using 16awg wire,this took approx 350 turns and going for 2000 winds which works out about 760 feet.
Will finish off winding it between other stuff.
Cheers
Sean.
Nice to see you on this Sean, I hope this will give the concept a boost to encourage others to explore it. May I ask what you're going to use for the primary core?
Quote from: broli on August 06, 2011, 05:13:20 PM
Nice to see you on this Sean, I hope this will give the concept a boost to encourage others to explore it. May I ask what you're going to use for the primary core?
Hi Broli
For the primary, the same steel doughnut shell as Mavendex used, wrapped with 9awg.
Cheers
Sean.
Can anyone say how hard it is to cut Permalloy? I've got a metal saw that does well getting through 1/4" thick pure Titanium. Would Permalloy likely be harder than Titanium to cut? I don't see anything in it that looks like it is real hard by itself other than Molybdenum.
Permalloy is 80% nickle and 20% iron with a little yum yum in there, I would think it would be fairly simple to work.
Question to all the really smart guys out there, please keep in mind Im not a super scientist or a Electrical engineer, Im just a tinkerer and trying to make this place better.
Heres the question, Powerfactor if on the input of the transformer you have 0 power factor and you are still powering a load on your secondary side no matter how much energy your useing on the primary everything that your useing returns to the source right?
IE if you have 120 volts x 20 Amps x 0 pf you are actually useing 0 watts cause everything goes back to what ever your drawing off of, then your secondary is powering 500 watts that would be 500 watts of free energy am I correct?
Or is it that simple.
Quote from: Mavendex on August 07, 2011, 04:06:30 PM
Permalloy is 80% nickle and 20% iron with a little yum yum in there, I would think it would be fairly simple to work.
Question to all the really smart guys out there, please keep in mind Im not a super scientist or a Electrical engineer, Im just a tinkerer and trying to make this place better.
Heres the question, Powerfactor if on the input of the transformer you have 0 power factor and you are still powering a load on your secondary side no matter how much energy your useing on the primary everything that your useing returns to the source right?
IE if you have 120 volts x 20 Amps x 0 pf you are actually useing 0 watts cause everything goes back to what ever your drawing off of, then your secondary is powering 500 watts that would be 500 watts of free energy am I correct?
Or is it that simple.
Correct. If there's truly no coupling as is mentioned here then the only power draw limit would be the materials that are used although I still have no idea how or why this transformer does what it does.
Quote from: Mavendex on August 07, 2011, 04:06:30 PM
IE if you have 120 volts x 20 Amps x 0 pf you are actually useing 0 watts cause everything goes back to what ever your drawing off of, then your secondary is powering 500 watts that would be 500 watts of free energy am I correct?
Or is it that simple.
If you had no load on the secondary, you are still powering the primary.
So the energy will go to heat down to Joule Heating, so you will still be using energy to put power throught that coil.
Can't we just keep a constant load on the device and utilize the free source, IE sterling engine, capacitors, heater, multiple heaters, battery charger, ... then the Transformer/Device would then return all the energy used and we store the stuff that was created?
Or put a switch on the primary input?
Quote from: Mavendex on August 07, 2011, 06:48:49 PM
Can't we just keep a constant load on the device and utilize the free source, IE sterling engine, capacitors, heater, multiple heaters, battery charger, ... then the Transformer/Device would then return all the energy used and we store the stuff that was created?
Or put a switch on the primary input?
I think your next goal is to close the loop.
If you have got more energy out than you are putting in, then put a middle man storage device in place such as a big Cap. Jump start the Primary to get it going. Loop the secondary to the Cap and when it is at full charge feed this back to the primary and cut the main supply.
Then monitor power and see how long it lasts, if it keeps going then start adding a extra load to the secondary and build it up till you have pulled what you can without stopping the loop.
With any coil/inductor such as your Primary when pulsing, we get nearly all the power back when we cut the power. This comes back in the form of the back spike or BEMF. The rest of the energy losses get swallowed up with heat and a few other factors.
Hence why we so many claims of rotor vonfigs self charging from bemf spikes.
Looks like I got some more to learn then.... on the close loop. Good thing internet is cheap :)
Quote from: CLaNZeR on August 07, 2011, 07:11:38 PM
With any coil/inductor such as your Primary when pulsing, we get nearly all the power back when we cut the power. This comes back in the form of the back spike or BEMF. The rest of the energy losses get swallowed up with heat and a few other factors.
In a normal, or common transformer, if the secondary is loaded, the primary isnt able to take advantage of that bemf.
Maybe this transformer can do it. This is if the primary is pulsed, not just flexing from constant AC.
It is interesting though maybe... In a common transformer, the input to the primary increases as the sec is loaded harder. This means that the primary allows more current to flow as the sec produces current in a load. So if we were to cutoff the primary say near peak and use a freewheel diode, as long as the sec current flows, the primary diode should concur. Possibly to finish off the cycle somewhat close to what the norm is. If so, did we save on input at all?
Mags
Just thoughts
Quote from: Magluvin on August 07, 2011, 08:14:40 PM
In a normal, or common transformer, if the secondary is loaded, the primary isnt able to take advantage of that bemf.
Maybe this transformer can do it. This is if the primary is pulsed, not just flexing from constant AC.
It is interesting though maybe... In a common transformer, the input to the primary increases as the sec is loaded harder. This means that the primary allows more current to flow as the sec produces current in a load. So if we were to cutoff the primary say near peak and use a freewheel diode, as long as the sec current flows, the primary diode should concur. Possibly to finish off the cycle somewhat close to what the norm is. If so, did we save on input at all?
Mags
Just thoughts
I've been thinking along similar lines, Mags and Mav and Clanzers, and I wish I knew more transformer theory, although I've taught university-level electrodynamics! I've been learning more transformer science at a practical level, such as reducing hysterisis losses and eddy-current losses. I don't think Mr. Lenz's losses are inevitable either, but that will take more study.
Anyway, modern transformers approach 98% efficiency or so, and we would do well to learn how this is achieved, for even if we get a demonstrably OU device, it may still have unnecessary losses that will generate unwanted heat.
Hello everyone, finally I can connect in my vacation location.
QuoteI don't think Mr. Lenz's losses are inevitable either, but that will take more study.
Lenz law is not losses it's a counter EMF or rather a counter MMF, based of "Action-Reaction" law in conservative systems... But the difference is apparently with some config we can use this energy also and recycle it... For example 90% recycling will give you a COP of 10...
QuoteAnyway, modern transformers approach 98% efficiency or so, and we would do well to learn how this is achieved, for even if we get a demonstrably OU device, it may still have unnecessary losses that will generate unwanted heat.
Moderns trafos, have this kind of efficiency because reduction of hysteresis loss, eddy, and copper windings, a funny thing is more the transformer is powerfull less it have losses !!!
@Mav, Yeah PF = 0 is when your power is only virtual (reactive power) this power circulating back and forth between the source and coil/capacitor, no real energy is consummed (except) R losses (P=R*I^2 losses)...
For the permalloy, after reflection you should be right, since it's easy to magnetise and saturate, everything to decrease input current (even reactive) is welcome !!!
What's happened when you heavy load or dead short the secondary, huge spark ? Voltage droop ? current limited by wire R and over heat ?
Related to this BEMF discussion, I want to share something I learned recently when I explored the Heins effect. Realized that BEMF is your friend, not the enemy. Just treat it correctly and it works for you, I try to explain this below.
I trashed few trafos, one large and 3 small ones. I took the E-I parts of laminated iron from the bigger (trafo from my old Amiga computer, science needs its sacrifices hehe) and three primary coils from smaller christmas light trafos. These coils were very thin wire, output rated to 20.8 watts and they were rectangular shaped, 15 mm * 27.5 mm hole size. There is easily over ten thousand turns in one coil and when it is used to feed a christmas light hardly any current passes if there is no load. I put primary in the middle of larger E-frame and two secondaries sideways to primary in left and right side. When finished, those E-plates connect all three coils and after core of middle coil is filled up rest of core goes only between secondaries using only I shaped parts here. So there is alternate path that goes only between secondary coils, to get the Heins effect.
Before I managed to trash my voltmeter, I measured the voltage at secondary side to be about 80-90 Volts on each coil. I then connected secondaries together in parallel so I had only one output. I am quessing it was at higher voltage, enough to light a 220 v bulb but did not measure this. If coils are connected in wrong way then output is zero volts, no power.
When I put current though the primary and 40 w light bulb, the light is dim when there is no load applied. Then I placed 40 w light bulb at the output and result was nice to watch. The light on the primary side went down as the light on the secondary side was lit. When I took power using only one secondary coil the effect was gone, the light on primary side glow brighter when adding load working like a normal trafo. So those secondaries were aiding each other.
Next I put 350 watt electric saw as load (note the coils were rated 20.8 watts. I quess motor rated at 350 watts should not make a sound with 20.8 watts of power). When I press the start button little, the motor starts and light dimms little. When I press the start button more and more, motor runs faster and light dimms to a point it is no longer visible. Based on the sound I got it run about half the maximum speed, very nice. So the more load I take from this trafo the less it uses the primary side.
It seems that it created power on demand using mostly BEMF from those secondaries. The flux of one secondary goes to the other and since it has the same direction as the flux from primary it adds power, same happens with the other secondary. What I dont understand is why current in the primary side goes down though.
Now imagine what the output would be when using higher permeability material as alternate path between secondaries. Maybe someone could give a try using better materials. Mine was very quick and dirty hack using existing stuff that was just lying around unused.
I think Thane was fooling us a little, you can get much much more power that just 11 watts from this kind of trafo. Size of my version was only about 70 mm * 60 mm * 50 mm. I hope you understood my description of how I made this, no pics available.
I Have added pictures that Mavendex kindly sent to an Album on my site.
Various coils and progress.
http://www.overunity.org.uk/album.php?albumid=246
Good stuff David !
Cheers
Sean.
Quote from: Jack Noskills on August 08, 2011, 04:23:31 AM
I hope you understood my description of how I made this, no pics available.
Many people make this mistake over and over, thinking others can magically visualize what they are talking about with words, please do us a favour and just draw it out in microsoft paint or something, it takes zero to no effort and would demystify so much. For instance the below crappy illustration is made in only 30 sec time but eliminates any speculation.
I came up with this, maybe this conveys the idea better.
Quote from: Jack Noskills on August 08, 2011, 05:59:54 AM
I came up with this, maybe this conveys the idea better.
Thanks that's much better. Let me help out with a 3d version.
It's an interesting and straightforward setup.
Are the frames, the blue & red or white & grey, depending on which 2D/3D pic you are looking at, isolated from each other (electrically) or not ?
Thanks for pics, this design look promising also, another Thane variant !!! I will save those pics for further experiment and backup data, after Tesla/Gabriel device experiment...
@ Jack: the input power is on the center leg right ? And you use high perm for the secondary circuit or the same for both ?
Thanks broli, that is much better picture.
Magnetec has oval shape cores, by connecting two ovals in the middle, then a suitable nano/magneperm core on top of that (or both sides) would be equivalent to this. A hamburger.
Only difference to my crude prototype would be that those ovals would not touch each other in the middle because of protective casing. This might make things different, but theres always a grinder if cores must touch. If I had 200-300 Eur to spare I would certainly try this out, multistrand square Litz wire to ease winding, maybe 5*5, connecting individual strands to get only one strand active...
Schubert, input is the center leg. My prototype was iron so I would quess that works even if permeability is the same for both cores. But my bet is that higher permeability second core would be much better.
Hi Jack,
I have been waiting so long to have a go at this one.
Having read and read then re-read again your post, if I understand correctly, the three primary
coils are from identical transformers.
In Broli's 3D, he shows the centre coil mounted sideways. Would this be correct?
I have a good feeling about this and can't help but see a link to LOCKRIDGE.
I have several MOTs that I have taken the coils out from and kept the laminations. Will attemp
to put this together.
Kindest Regards, Penno
Quote from: penno64 on August 08, 2011, 07:44:15 AM
In Broli's 3D, he shows the centre coil mounted sideways. Would this be correct?
If you're talking about the crappy paint illustration I made then no that's not correct, I just made it to demonstrate a point, and I also just removed it to prevent further confusion. The 3d rendition is the correct one.
Coils are from identical transformers.
Center is sideways. As it is rectangular the core is first filled up there but still leaving empty space in secondaries. Then you just loop secondaries together. Broli's excellent 3d picture shows this nicely.
In my test setup 15 mm * 15 mm of iron is shared between all coils and 15 * 12.5 mm is shared only between secondaries. The size of hole in my coil was 15 * 27.5 mm.
If you have any kind of rectangular coils you can use them. The effect will be there, only power will be different. It is important to have lots of turns in the primary so you need to use as little input current as possible. We are only interested in the magnetic field, the electric company may keep its expensive current lol.
Thanks Broli,
I guess I should have worded my question better.
The lighter colour in you magic 3D, needs to fill the centre coil (primary) only, but
the outer coils (secondaries), need to have both the outer limbs of the "E" and the Rectangular
cores through them.
I guess that why I was asking if the coils are identical.
Regards and Thanks, Penno
Sorry Jack, I was typing this post when you responded. I will leave it here anyway
and thank you, you have answered my question - precisely.
Kindest Regards, Penno
Quote from: CLaNZeR on August 08, 2011, 04:46:00 AM
I Have added pictures that Mavendex kindly sent to an Album on my site.
Various coils and progress.
http://www.overunity.org.uk/album.php?albumid=246
Good stuff David !
Cheers
Sean.
Beautiful work and photos.
It appears that you have an inner (secondary) winding of approx 16 AWG red wire, then thicker yellow wire, THEN the "exhaust donut" and then a THIRD winding of red wire...
Is that correct? why THREE windings? I thought just two were needed.
Also, is the "exhaust donut" from that place in Nebraska mentioned earlier in this thread (or where)?
Thanks for the photos -- very impressive work. I hope it works!
This is good stuff guys but it is clearly related to BiTT, and not the gabriel device.
can you move your discussion to the BiTT thread here?:
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7833.255 (http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7833.255)
Thanks!
It works to the fact that a 0 powerfactor can be reached, you can wind down the primary to make that happen or input lots of amps with less turns on the primary.
The donut is made out of L&S and the yellow wire was just to fillout the space its all 16 awg but the yellow wire is insulted and is 10 awg with the insulation.
Ive been looking at the 98% efficient transformers the Z.B.D. and some of them are closed core which is interesting.
If it didn't cost so blasted much to have new tooling created getting that outer shell closer to the inner core would probably increase efficiency. which is another reason why Im opting to have the shell made out of Permalloy this next time around. then if we can get better results Ill have another made with new tooling. Wish I had like 10k all at once so I could just do this without having to scrimp and save to have stuff made but oh well all in good time.
@Jack:
Square cores on both sides might provide improved efficiency:
@ Jack, your idea remember me something that I have posted one year ago... in the BITT topic look at those post !!!
My version at this time...
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7833.msg261652#msg261652 (http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7833.msg261652#msg261652)
Another version for laser cutting...
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7833.msg261183#msg261183 (http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7833.msg261183#msg261183)
Alexander Frolov and BITT connection...
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7833.msg264007#msg264007 (http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7833.msg264007#msg264007)
And you should read the whole BITT thread it's a 18 pages thread but a lot of info !!!
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7833.0 (http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7833.0) 8) 8) 8)
Quote from: teslaalset on August 05, 2011, 06:24:14 AM
Hi Broli,
Found another link you might be interested in that also mentions permalloy sheet:
http://www.espimetals.com/index.php/online-catalog/831-permalloy
I tried simulating the original Gabriel device in Ansys Maxwell, but it appears that too much input power is required to get the outer shell saturated in case of pure iron.
The example shells are simply too thick to work out a practical implementation.
Iron sheet would help out as well probably and is a bit cheaper than any permalloy material I guess.
I wrote to espimetals.com requesting a quote on some permalloy cores. They won't even give me a quote without knowing I'm either at a University or a company (probably a known one). Any one have any suggestions? I know I could try faking a company name but I think I tried something like that in the past when trying to buy some metals and they just refused to sell. I'm beginning to wonder if this is part of some conspiracy to keep us from free energy. This just seems very strange as I can't imagine this very small size I requested could be used for anything bad. Any insights into this strange behavior?
Look it like this:
For selling wholesale to companies you need least people, least time, lots of items => max earnings
If they sell it to the university for the needs of research, then the university will publish the results in respected publications if they discover anything significant.
In reflection to that company's b2b sales would go up.
If they sell you one or few items, they are just wasting their resources: people+time=money.
This kind of behavior is not conspiracy, its capitalism. ;)
I put some comparison test results in the BiTT thread in page 18. Results are quite interesting.
Quote from: futuristic on August 09, 2011, 02:36:59 AM
Look it like this:
For selling wholesale to companies you need least people, least time, lots of items => max earnings
If they sell it to the university for the needs of research, then the university will publish the results in respected publications if they discover anything significant.
In reflection to that company's b2b sales would go up.
If they sell you one or few items, they are just wasting their resources: people+time=money.
This kind of behavior is not conspiracy, its capitalism. ;)
Yes that may be part of it. I did state in my email the potential for a big increase in orders of this material if things in my research worked out. I'm thinking it may be more along the lines that they don't have stock and to create a small amount would be a lot of effort. Maybe I can get hold of some company to buy some for me but then I expect it may end up being too costly.
Took a bit of sloothing but they are definitely not the only ones that sell stuff.
http://www.suppliersonline.com/propertypages/hymu80.asp#RelatedNames
and here is where you can get it pretty much anyway you want
http://www.suppliersonline.com/buy/exchange/post/FormExpress.asp?Family=15&Metal=2342
some of it is in stock and ready to ship.
Happy hunting
Mav
Thanks Mav! I have tried looking around in the past without much luck on Permalloy type materials. I'll give this one a try.
Rant mode so skip this if you are only interested in Mav's project and not the price of Permalloy:
I got a response from one of those suppliers. I was actually looking for 1/4" diameter rod in Permalloy for another project. I asked for a quote on 1/4" x 20 inches and they sent a quote for 1/4" x 30 inches. $389.00 ! Oh but it gets much better. The ESPI metals someone mentioned here that wouldn't give me a quote initially. I made up a company name for myself and they then sent a quote. It was for 1/4" x 20 inches. $1109.00 - Oh and an $8.00 handling fee. I didn't realize this stuff was made out of Gold (now $1780 per ounce) Sheeeezzzzz I think Permalloy is just iron, copper, nickel and molybdenum. None of those are even close to expensive - not even molybdenum is that expensive. That's just sick. Even if place #2 bought it at full price from place #1 they'd be making over $700 profit on just one little piece of 0.25 inch diameter rod.
Quote from: e2matrix on August 10, 2011, 07:59:33 PM
Rant mode so skip this if you are only interested in Mav's project and not the price of Permalloy:
I got a response from one of those suppliers. I was actually looking for 1/4" diameter rod in Permalloy for another project. I asked for a quote on 1/4" x 20 inches and they sent a quote for 1/4" x 30 inches. $389.00 ! Oh but it gets much better. The ESPI metals someone mentioned here that wouldn't give me a quote initially. I made up a company name for myself and they then sent a quote. It was for 1/4" x 20 inches. $1109.00 - Oh and an $8.00 handling fee. I didn't realize this stuff was made out of Gold (now $1780 per ounce) Sheeeezzzzz I think Permalloy is just iron, copper, nickel and molybdenum. None of those are even close to expensive - not even molybdenum is that expensive. That's just sick. Even if place #2 bought it at full price from place #1 they'd be making over $700 profit on just one little piece of 0.25 inch diameter rod.
yup like 700 bucks for a plate 30" x 14"
Raw materials (in powder form?) and a metal caster?
http://www.backyardmetalcasting.com/ (http://www.backyardmetalcasting.com/)
http://www.backyardmetalcasting.com/bucketfurnace1.html (http://www.backyardmetalcasting.com/bucketfurnace1.html)
Maybe you can contact one of those guys for a far better backyard deal :p.
I was searching for magnetic tape materials while I got grazy idea, how about using videotape as a shield ? Video is stored magnetically on tape. Poor mans magnetic tape, better not run heat treatment for that tho.
Winding toroids is tedious, so in order to avoid huge disappointment this can be tested using normal magnet. Put some tape between magnet and metal object and see if magnets ability to move the metal object changes.
Quote from: Jack Noskills on August 11, 2011, 06:49:21 AM
Winding toroids is tedious, so in order to avoid huge disappointment this can be tested using normal magnet. Put some tape between magnet and metal object and see if magnets ability to move the metal object changes.
Let me see if I get you on this, to avoid disappointment take a magnet like lets say a neo magnet put tape on it and see if the ability to move a metal object has been retarded?
lets see ok Big neo check, moves metal check, taped up magnet does it still move the metal yup same distance same metal :)
Im not really worried about disappointment, I know the PF can go to 0 or real real close to 0 with this current shell. So to make things better or more practical then we just go ahead and make the shell a better magnetic conductor, easier to charge holds the bemf better.
Cold rolled steel, can be brute forced in to submission, this is a fact. If better materials are available and I got money to burn on open sourceing a reliable solid state fluxing inductor that returns everything to the source while outputting a nice gain more than a mere 30 watts then its not a disappointment.
To take a collage course in physics it costs quite a bit and then your just left with knowledge and no practical experience, where I could use that same money get some sweet materials and go hog wild get the same if not more knowledge, practical experience, and a proof positive concept that everyone can use to better themselves, as better and better materials are created over time the same concept device will improve, roomtemp superconducting wire for instance, graphene, supermalloy and other mu metals, all have a place in the future. ""I should also add engineering techniques and geometry's also enhance output"
Gabby is a infant vs. all the other techs out there that took people 10+ years to develop and 100's of thousands of dollars for small gains.
I only use this place to open source ideas so it can be utilized by people that have more knowledge and experience than myself, as I learn and move forward so doesn't everything else.
So to avoid a huge disappointment, I don't rely on others to get the job done, cause if want something done right you gotta doit yourself.
Do or Do Not there is no Try
Mav
Nice that you actually tested this. Sometimes wacky ideas work, sometimes they work differently than expected, most of the times they don't work at all. But even failure is usefull because you can learn why it failed and gain more understanding. Better not to rely on text books alone, your own imagination and intuition may provide better results. But I think you know this already seeing what you have come up with so far.
By disappointment I meant you would first unwound your primary winding, remove steel core, put on the tape, wind primary again and it does not work, hmm, maybe more layers ? Trying again with more tape and eventually realize 'oh crap this is shit' and return to original design. Hours of work would have been wasted.
Now thinking again it is good tape did not work, it is a lot easier just to put a shell than do third toroidal winding using tape. But still wondering would tape using nanoperm material be any different than iron wire that did not work. Then again, you already have a working concept so why change it drastically.
Have you tried what happens if you increase the number of turns in primary and secondary, lets say to two layers ? If you use bifilar windings, has it any notable difference in behaviour ? You must have been tried lots of different variations and you have mentioned about them. This is good so anyone doing replication learns what does work and what does not giving room for more ideas. As you open sourced this I believe there could be more progress being made if all having this setup availeble for testing would team up virtually. One document that would describe what changes has been tried, what effects it had, some experimental results and so on. But where to store it so that it is easy to find ?
The first version put 450 watts out, what kind of output level have you reached with the new shell ? I recall you saying you got 12 watts out of 1 but what is that as total output power, 600 watts ?
Quote from: Jack Noskills on August 12, 2011, 02:57:25 AM
Nice that you actually tested this. Sometimes wacky ideas work, sometimes they work differently than expected, most of the times they don't work at all. But even failure is usefull because you can learn why it failed and gain more understanding. Better not to rely on text books alone, your own imagination and intuition may provide better results. But I think you know this already seeing what you have come up with so far.
By disappointment I meant you would first unwound your primary winding, remove steel core, put on the tape, wind primary again and it does not work, hmm, maybe more layers ? Trying again with more tape and eventually realize 'oh crap this is shit' and return to original design. Hours of work would have been wasted.
Now thinking again it is good tape did not work, it is a lot easier just to put a shell than do third toroidal winding using tape. But still wondering would tape using nanoperm material be any different than iron wire that did not work. Then again, you already have a working concept so why change it drastically.
Have you tried what happens if you increase the number of turns in primary and secondary, lets say to two layers ? If you use bifilar windings, has it any notable difference in behaviour ? You must have been tried lots of different variations and you have mentioned about them. This is good so anyone doing replication learns what does work and what does not giving room for more ideas. As you open sourced this I believe there could be more progress being made if all having this setup availeble for testing would team up virtually. One document that would describe what changes has been tried, what effects it had, some experimental results and so on. But where to store it so that it is easy to find ?
The first version put 450 watts out, what kind of output level have you reached with the new shell ? I recall you saying you got 12 watts out of 1 but what is that as total output power, 600 watts ?
with powerfactor involved you can make the output pretty ridicules numbers,
so far the mix I have going right now is 5.2 ohms of wire on the inside cause all the wire gets all of the flux plus the nanoperm kicks in at around 15 amps, the 15 amps can probably be made less with a core that is closer to the nanoperm itself but then you lose turns, or better materials the functionality of it is pretty interesting and the newer better shell will be most fantastic.
but with this shell you can get the output really high, although you would need around 378 - 400 turns on the outside this changes the powerfactor and what not to around .25 and that all depends on what load you have on it. If its set as a distribution transformer hehe wow pf would be in the .07 range really low, geometry really really helps In my opinion, I have a couple of different winding strategies that help move the field around better, but thats just my opinion.
but at this point if you drop like 2000+ turns on the secondary and go about 400 turns on the primary you will see +output conventionally wound, if you use a different winding strat. you can make much more.
400 turns on the primary and a variac that goes to about 20 amps will get you a pf of .25 once you start adding more voltage than amps the pf will start to rise again, but Im confident the reaction is just starting at 15 amps the 9 gauge wire can handle quite a bit so people with 30 - 40 amp variacs would get outputs that would probably melt the 16 gauge on the inside.
my variac goes to 130volts so 130x20x.25 = 650 input which isn't bad 130x20x.07 = 182 which is better and unloaded like a distribution transformer.
Considering your voltages will spike once your amp pool is filled on the secondary once that happens the chain reaction gets stronger and stronger the more amps you input and your pf should decrease as well untill your ethier at 0 or stop putting in amps.
see haveing less layers in the innercore doesn't really help much cause it will always get the same amount of flux, so more layers and it will absorb all of that, as well this means your voltages can get in the killavolt realm once your amp pool is filled, so lets say you just fill a amp pool of 2 amps, well now the volts will spike according to how much amperage/voltage you put in and layers of wire you have on the secondary, if you have enough turns then your output will just multiply and multiply and multiply. you will always keep those 2 amps and that voltage should get pretty darn silly. 600volts out at 2 amps is around 1200 watts I think right for the low low price of 650 and in reality once you get voltage high enough your output will truly be more than your input. no powerfactor needed but ill take it if your gonna give it out.
Volts input play a part but its very minor. Its all about the amps and how much flux you can deliver to the unit, flux is a two lane street and thats where geometry comes in to play, by winding a coil in a fashion that is (how should we say) less conventional, you can actually boost your flux thru the secondary.
So the answer to your question, how much power output can I get out of the unit? the limits of the wire! how much have I gotten out of a particular unit more than 650 watts :) and im not telling hehe.
No worries that is why I decided to open source plus I still have a whole 6 months to build a nonprofit and all that jazz, I have another better prototype here at the home stead, and building a couple more smaller guys to see if we can make some stuff that will go in a computer or something. As well I await the almighty permalloy shell!
Not only that btw you don't have to stick to 16 awg for innerwinding I use it cause it makes me feel like a brute when I get it all wound up. like I said all the flux gets delivered to the innercore your not loseing anything, which means you could make 1 or 2 KV or more with smaller wire :)
The device is designed for distribution and a house hold input power which when your talking 1000's of watts out + the electric company should be pretty happy.
Its not so tough if you want to close loop it Im sure we can do that as well just for peas and carrots.
So ya you can consider the laws of thermodynamics, officially popped, lenz's law violated, and the world will be saved :) energy crisis officially over and your welcome :D cause we can put these puppy's in cars as is heheh, not to mention the permalloy shell that I will get soon.
If people would actually stop being greedy and power hungry, lieing and attempting to steal things cause they think they can (and they are dead wrong about that, can't spend money when your locked in a 6x6 room.)
I would think the human race would be in pretty good shape at this point. whats really nice tho is even tho people have tried to burn me on this and will probably continue to do so. The fact of the matter is this is just one of my tricks next we break gravity.
Mav
Dave
Mavendex
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi9.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fa57%2FMavendex%2F2011-08-11_18-23-23_697_Kearney.jpg&hash=d2ca82f68e312002dbfb83a0d2bb9cd328764625)
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi9.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fa57%2FMavendex%2F2011-08-11_18-23-23_697_Kearney.jpg&hash=d2ca82f68e312002dbfb83a0d2bb9cd328764625)
Hi Dave/Mav,
I realize you have alot on your plate so I will keep this short.
I have been following this thread since the very day your pictures were posted on peswiki, and even attempted a cheap replication of my own. Even though my replication failed (I didnt have a nanoperm core), I still find this theory to be the most promising and plausible on the internet.
However, as hopeful as I am that your claims are true (violating lenz law and saving the world), historically, claims of these types always fall apart when they attempt to go closed loop.
I am like many others who want to see change, but cant afford to replicate every idea or theory on the internet that looks promising, only to find out later the claims were either a fraud or the result of a measurement error. For that reason, like many others, I focus on the ones that show reasonable proof of closed loop operation.
So,... Im asking,. begging even, bring out your peas and carrots.
Try to go closed loop and post your findings so that those with limited funding will have the confidence to replicate and start the chain reaction that will change the world.
Quote from: importfanatik on August 13, 2011, 01:51:40 PM
Hi Dave/Mav,
I realize you have alot on your plate so I will keep this short.
I have been following this thread since the very day your pictures were posted on peswiki, and even attempted a cheap replication of my own. Even though my replication failed (I didnt have a nanoperm core), I still find this theory to be the most promising and plausible on the internet.
However, as hopeful as I am that your claims are true (violating lenz law and saving the world), historically, claims of these types always fall apart when they attempt to go closed loop.
I am like many others who want to see change, but cant afford to replicate every idea or theory on the internet that looks promising, only to find out later the claims were either a fraud or the result of a measurement error. For that reason, like many others, I focus on the ones that show reasonable proof of closed loop operation.
So,... Im asking,. begging even, bring out your peas and carrots.
Try to go closed loop and post your findings so that those with limited funding will have the confidence to replicate and start the chain reaction that will change the world.
Roger
Btw there's also that thing called the overunity prize on this forum:
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=2157.0 (http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=2157.0)
Not to make you money hungry or anything but if you can make a simple, even a small transformer that lights a small light bulb indefinitely and send it in 3 fold, you COULD have a little boost in your research funding.
Quote from: broli on August 13, 2011, 02:52:21 PM
Btw there's also that thing called the overunity prize on this forum:
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=2157.0 (http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=2157.0)
Not to make you money hungry or anything but if you can make a simple, even a small transformer that lights a small light bulb indefinitely and send it in 3 fold, you COULD have a little boost in your research funding.
neat didn't know about the prize money, but its not really a issue money comes and goes, time is the ultimate resource.
@Mavendex, I'm curious about something I asked a couple of pages ago. If the inner coil is energized and the outer coil produces no voltage then it means there's something very wrong with faraday's law. We have changing flux (the nanoperm core) and a current loop around this (outer coil) yet there's no voltage being produced. The magnetic domains of the outer shell should also not be affected as the field would be contained in the nanoperm core.
The other way around when you energize the outer coil, the inner nanoperm core is magnetised or else the inner coil wouldn't produce a voltage. BUT when this inner coil is allowed current to flow through it surely this should then counter act the alternating field of the nanoperm core and reduce the overal inductance on the primary? However this also seems not to happen.
With the other BTT variants I could at least pretend to see a reason but this one is truly mind boggling.
Why don't we skip the inner core material all together by using a Rodin coil which of course always throws its magnetic field (which is very strong even without a core at all) above and below itself? Any wire, even uninsulated will do since it doesn't short out any ways and the Rodin coil is 62% more efficient than any other coil design at producing a magnetic field??
And current limiting is much easier than I see proposed....lets use a light blub(s) in series with the primary. Many sizes (wattages) to choose from and easy to change for experimenting.
As for a mold to make a 11 inch coil there is a CordPro cord holder made from plastic we can use, 11" overall Diameter with a 3.85 thickness and also the height with a 4.50 inch hole width. See it at this link http://www.cordpro.com/ I found one at the thrift store brand new for $4.50 total. They have even bigger ones to use to mold the outer cover with. Simple is the word for this mold setup and it is convenient as well. Perhaps they would consider making a small run without the cordpro embossing. They have a mini one too! maybe these will be suitable for most of us wanting to pour our own, Teflon spray coating should work for a mold release agent, what do you think?? Someone please comment on this input so I know it is getting thru please.
Perhaps cermet would be a great mix to mold with.
Edited for correctness and spelling.
Quote from: Hope on August 13, 2011, 08:13:05 PM
Why don't we skip the inner core material all together by using a Rodin coil which of course always throws its magnetic field (which is very strong even without a core at all) above and below itself? Any wire, even uninsulated will do since it doesn't short out any ways and the Rodin coil is 62% more efficient than any other coil design at producing a magnetic field??
And current limiting is much easier than I see proposed....lets use a light blub(s) in series with the primary. Many sizes (wattages) to choose from and easy to change for experimenting.
As for a mold to make a 11 inch coil there is a CordPro cord holder made from plastic we can use, 11" overall Diameter with a 3.85 thickness and also the height with a 4.50 inch hole width. See it at this link http://www.cordpro.com/ I found one at the thrift store brand new for $4.50 total. They have even bigger ones to use to mold the outer cover with. Simple is the word for this mold setup and it is convenient as well. Perhaps they would consider making a small run without the cordpro embossing. They have a mini one too! maybe these will be suitable for most of us wanting to pour our own, Teflon spray coating should work for a mold release agent, what do you think?? Someone please comment on this input so I know it is getting thru please.
Perhaps cermet would be a great mix to mold with.
Edited for correctness and spelling.
Thats not a bad idea and should be tried :)
Quote from: broli on August 13, 2011, 05:21:59 PM
@Mavendex, I'm curious about something I asked a couple of pages ago. If the inner coil is energized and the outer coil produces no voltage then it means there's something very wrong with faraday's law. We have changing flux (the nanoperm core) and a current loop around this (outer coil) yet there's no voltage being produced. The magnetic domains of the outer shell should also not be affected as the field would be contained in the nanoperm core.
The other way around when you energize the outer coil, the inner nanoperm core is magnetised or else the inner coil wouldn't produce a voltage. BUT when this inner coil is allowed current to flow through it surely this should then counter act the alternating field of the nanoperm core and reduce the overal inductance on the primary? However this also seems not to happen.
With the other BTT variants I could at least pretend to see a reason but this one is truly mind boggling.
Distance of the magnetic field, and the nanoperm can only hold so much.
So now you have answered your own question it seems. The core can only saturate and no more. Following the path of least resistance to the secondary coil and core. It would seem that the metal doughnut barriers or COULD barrier the transfer.
My real big confusion arises from what simulation results in FEMM and vizimag show on most BTT variants. Basically they show a significant decrease of flux or inductance of the primary core/coil, as a conventional transformer would while experiments don't.
Could there be a fundamental difference between a steady state and continuously varying state? I'll post the simulation results in the morning.
its all just a guess, im not saying I know the exact function of it, I just trial and error, listen to the sounds it makes, make adjustments, and doit again.
we don't know all the laws yet, in other galaxys the laws of physics aren't the same as they are here, so whats to say that the very laws that we know of now aren't entirely correct. thats all science is, computers are garbage in and garbage out machines if they are programmed for said instance well thats what your gonna get. Nothing better than getting your hands dirty and actually working the problem.
Touching on a variant using old Ed L's magnetics theories. Has anyone placed a chain within the path of a Rodin Coil vortex (through the center) to see if has discoupled magnetic fields that can be collected thru coils wrapped on the or a link of the chain? Granted this chain may have to be insulated to keep it from bumping into the vortex center wires and perhaps bending them or causing damage. BTY this island I live on is surrounded by beaches with black sand available for the collecting.
Quote from: Hope on August 15, 2011, 12:31:48 AM
Touching on a variant using old Ed L's magnetics theories. Has anyone placed a chain within the path of a Rodin Coil vortex (through the center) to see if has discoupled magnetic fields that can be collected thru coils wrapped on the or a link of the chain? Granted this chain may have to be insulated to keep it from bumping into the vortex center wires and perhaps bending them or causing damage. BTY this island I live on is surrounded by beaches with black sand available for the collecting.
I think I got a total of 6 volts by putting a wrapped pipe in a rodin coil vortex, The rodin coil was being juiced by 1400 watts. Like I said the rodin coil is weak it needs alot more flux.
Got it! TY rodin coil not a working model yet. Did you let the rod spin? AND was the rod going over half way thru Rodin coil field, because if it was it would negate the other halves charges.
I will try a pvc ring separating the two bar halves and be careful as to tuning on the center zero point (if there is one). According to Walter Russell's drawings there are expansive electricity and contracting electricity and they can cancel each other. So I will try to keep the barrier intact between them.
The mold of the toroidal I suggested is large and we can make the inner core like you wish then mold the outer core in two half's separate electrically and join them insulated from each other, wind them and see what the large but close primary will give to the secondary with tolerances much closer. This molded primary core should be a lot better than 14 gauge steel if we select the mixture properly. What do you all think about the CordPro as a mold (they also make one twice as large and a smaller one also)
Quote from: Hope on August 15, 2011, 12:31:48 AM
Touching on a variant using old Ed L's magnetics theories. Has anyone placed a chain within the path of a Rodin Coil vortex (through the center) to see if has discoupled magnetic fields that can be collected thru coils wrapped on the or a link of the chain? Granted this chain may have to be insulated to keep it from bumping into the vortex center wires and perhaps bending them or causing damage. BTY this island I live on is surrounded by beaches with black sand available for the collecting.
Hope, Is your black beach sand magnetic?
Magnetite is found here, so I can find some and make powdered magnetite.
I live on Whidbey Island in the Puget Sound.
I am showing some ideas how the real full picture how expanding and contracting currents work. We are only taught about expanding currents which are marked by heat collecting. BUT there is a second part which we must learn to use as well. I know these ideas are incomplete and ruff but I want others here to see them anyways, so as to explain some now hidden working of matter.
More pics
Iron has LOTS of carbon so is a great attractor of most types of magnets (charge amount and frequency).
Quote from: Mavendex on August 15, 2011, 07:44:22 AM
I think I got a total of 6 volts by putting a wrapped pipe in a rodin coil vortex, The rodin coil was being juiced by 1400 watts. Like I said the rodin coil is weak it needs alot more flux.
Mav -- I'm having trouble visualizing this -- could you show a photo or drawing of your "rodin coil" and your "wrapped pipe"? would like to understand, and I appreciate your "hands-on" experimental approach.
Steve
Quote from: JouleSeeker on August 17, 2011, 01:07:33 PM
Mav -- I'm having trouble visualizing this -- could you show a photo or drawing of your "rodin coil" and your "wrapped pipe"? would like to understand, and I appreciate your "hands-on" experimental approach.
Steve
Russell's theory like Ed Leeds worked as did Tesla's. Ed's greatest clue left behind SHOWS or leads us to the conclusion that he had knowledge beyond normal science. Obviously he meant to leave the message "How did I do this" within any that pondered his work. Tesla showed us his results and wanted to share it all. William Russell could see and convey his insights thru exacting art displays. These three figures inspire many to persevere and not be thwarted in our endeavors. They all had knowledge of similar kind, a knowledge which is intentionally suppressed still today. But it is not hidden. They all had achieved a working knowledge of physical science (physics) and what we commonly label as the spiritual now days to them was even more than an unseen being. They knew it was this unseen side that had connection to every part of our world. There is a unseen balancing action to every movement in time and space. We should remember ALWAYS to include the balancing action in devising our designs. Tesla the builder, Ed the builder, Russell the conveyer all had powers beyond our contemporary science models because they we willing to fail as many times as it took to learn what was the balancing forces and how to master them. We will all do better if we seek this science and take courage in failure as a step up the ladder of knowledge. Not just "it doesn't work" but say to ourselves "what part failed and why" We know how to use current but do we know how to use magnetism, attraction, repulsion, heat, contraction? Nature does and will every time for us if we do not incoporate it into our designs. What purpose did Tesla have for the antenna besides gaining energy. It was NOT the energy to power the vehicle it was the energy to complete the cycle of balance which was the secret we still today are missing. What did Ed collect from magnets pointing away from his device. Did he collect unseen content, did his iron mass (engine) store this contents so he only had to filter it SLOWLY to use its discharge?
See thinking of circuits, there are many variations but balanced cycles there are few. Yet nature shows us how if we but slow down a bit and observe its ways.
Ed's coils and air capacitors may have been a way to just release selectively the forces he captured from the back side of his wheel. Is magnetic current or flow the other side of electrical current? Electrical is the expansive force and magnetic the contraction? How can we use this knowledge to enhance our designs, our storage or energy, even our definition of energy?
Please take the time to read and ponder this link: http://newlightondarkenergy.blogspot.com/2010/11/more-on-inconvenient-truths.html#comment-form
Triple Core Transformer mmmmmmm so much awesome is hard to contain I already broke it twice.
Mavendex please do not close loop ANY OU device without going through a regulator. The cascade avalanche will destroy the device so quickly it can't be stopped. Why would Permalloy shell be better? If we saturate it and the inner core, won't the Permalloy act like the inner core and keep lots of the field? Does anyone know if those shiny rock shaped magnets will work in the secondary core. Crushing them is OUT. They are way to hard to even break one with a 5 foot 60 lbs iron bar. I looked like that dwarf in Lord of the Rings trying to break the ring with his axe hammer. LOL
But I can make a magnetic ring of these rock magnets and seal them in resin. ??? Any ideas on this?? Should we try a camelot ring minus one magnet? This will create an imbalance which spins into a magnetic vortex naturally. Dave what do you think about this idea. Anyone else that has tried this let us know ahead of time on your results please.
Looking for materials to build Thanes device as well. I also think full core encapsulation is the most efficient way to capture all the output from the primary. We waste so much freed energy. Good thinking all!
I've been looking at this vid on YouTube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UfBcYyr0fWI
A very interesting concept and a bit of a mystery as to how it continues to work after the battery is disconnected. Once the ruler is connected it becomes a closed continuously working loop, broken only by the removal of the ruler (but as is evident, not instant disconnection, just a slow magnetic decay).
Why is it doing this ?
But more importantly could we possibly glean something from this experiment that may be useful in the Gabriel Device ?
Your thoughts please !
This PMH is showing the OTHER side of "Flow" not found in our school textbooks any longer. What they leave out is like a compass to what we should be paying attention to! But remember magnetic flow is in 90 degree opposition to electrical current flow, (what ever that means) according to Walter Russell. AND he also states that bar magnets have 4 pairs of poles not just one pair. Can anyone attempt to clarify what he means please?
Quote from: Hope on August 19, 2011, 07:10:22 PM
Mavendex please do not close loop ANY OU device without going through a regulator. The cascade avalanche will destroy the device so quickly it can't be stopped. Why would Permalloy shell be better? If we saturate it and the inner core, won't the Permalloy act like the inner core and keep lots of the field? Does anyone know if those shiny rock shaped magnets will work in the secondary core. Crushing them is OUT. They are way to hard to even break one with a 5 foot 60 lbs iron bar. I looked like that dwarf in Lord of the Rings trying to break the ring with his axe hammer. LOL
But I can make a magnetic ring of these rock magnets and seal them in resin. ??? Any ideas on this?? Should we try a camelot ring minus one magnet? This will create an imbalance which spins into a magnetic vortex naturally. Dave what do you think about this idea. Anyone else that has tried this let us know ahead of time on your results please.
Tell me about it that when you close the loop that it will smoke everything... need to just run a charger back to the battery me thinks, got input power down significantly!like 150 watts total no power factor :) but I broke the device after inputing more than 10 amps which is sadly alot of work to take apart and put back together good thing I have more than 1 core :)
Permalloy will saturate faster than steel, permalloy is easier to magnetize and get a 2 Tesla field going. but I figured out a way to doit without the permalloy.
My meaning on closed loop was that you meant sending the output directly back into the input without regulating it. On any working OU device that would cascade the ouput into extremes.
Quote from: Mavendex on August 20, 2011, 07:50:42 AM
but I figured out a way to doit without the permalloy.
Please elaborate.
Maybe a copper wire primary twisted together with a iron wire secondary? OR one of these babies:
http://www.rencousa.com/RL-1324.pdf
in a double capped pipe wrapped in a easy to saturate wire coil. This link has some pretty awesome amp capacities inductors.
I meant Walter Russell not William Russell
If we place RF withing the Rodin coil can we not then use a small florescent tube to follow the output vortex line of the Rodin coil and build a collector to match it?
Quote from: Hope on August 21, 2011, 09:14:30 AM
I meant Walter Russell not William Russell
If we place RF withing the Rodin coil can we not then use a small florescent tube to follow the output vortex line of the Rodin coil and build a collector to match it?
Again you need a ton of flux and the rodin coil has a beefed up B-field but no H, H = density, B= Strength, You can get your H from ferromagnetics, and that galvanized steel pipe is basically worthless probably would be better with Iron or a Permalloy rod or even a non galvanized steel rod something soft.
Now theres a trick to making the rodin coil work better, if you analyze the rodin coil you will notice you have 9 turns of 1 circuit and 9 turns of another, going around and thru making the little hole that focues the flux of said coil. if you notice there is 2 turns on the rodin coil that are directly next to each other that are opposite charge flow. thats the power right there that opposite charge flow of the rodin coil increases its power a ton.
Now how do you capitalize on that, "twisted Pair" but in lies another trick, if you lay 1 twisted pair next to another twisted pair you get diminishing returns and some cancellation because of the timing in the coil, so how do you get a bunch of turns on the coil to get the desired output? Every time you go around shift over 10 degrees, your inner hole will get tiny but you can stretch out the center and tape it back, and eventually after enough turns you can get enough juice to make some serious amperage. its just a real pain in the yang to build and takes a ton of time.
Just a few tricks you can try but most definitely something that juicy will levitate a 16 gram magnet with no problems the more you can squeeze on the more weight you can levitate. Or sling across a room at high velocity if you use a nice capacitor bank!
Mav
Just a quick post amongst my manic life !!
Got the inner core all wound up and happy with the resistance.
Now just waiting for the shell to arrive!
Cheers
Sean.
Awesome, Sean! Pls keep us up on your progress -- and more POWER to you!
Question --is the Gabriel device related to the Bi-Toroid Transformer? (BTT) See attached diagram.
There is the inner toroid (permalloy) and the outer shell which is also a toroid... in the Gabriel device.
My reasoning is that the primary in the Gabriel case sees TWO toroids, whereas the 2-ary sees just one toroid, the inner one.
Follow-on question -- can the Gabriel be re-designed as an equivalent BTT, with the "II" in the diagram becoming the primary and the "I" becoming the secondary? Has anyone tried this?
--StevenEJones
This would be closer to the Gabriel device, the thin "shell" I added to the left core. ;]
Mags
Hello, some news about the replication:
Yesterday, the shield was cut, and today starting experiment, my version is like the first Gabriel device presented in this topic:
The outer shell is cold rolled steel, and inner is nanoperm (u=30000)
Primary is with at choice: 15/70/120/150turns for 12V 50Hz...
Secondary is 117 turns...
I have tested different configuration and obtained strange result, like input current decreasing when I load secondary, but if I overload the input current goes up...
Just a bad thing I was not able to reproduce like the Mav version: The toaster at primary goes down but light at secondary is full brilliance...
More test still needed and I plan to buy True RMS watts meter because measuring with light bulbs is not very accurate (you don't see if input is reactive or working current)...
But it seems the output current depend directly of the input current...
Bad thing: When I feed the device with the inner coil, I have some EMF transfer, but the inner is saturated (B=1.41 Teslas) so I will test with amplifier at higher frequency to avoid saturation...
insulate your shell halves, wind it down to 0pf
Hey Mav
0pf? Do you mean capacitance between the shells, or the windings? ;]
Thanks for helping here ;]
Mags
Quote from: Magluvin on August 22, 2011, 12:42:57 PM
Hey Mav
0pf? Do you mean capacitance between the shells, or the windings? ;]
Thanks for helping here ;]
Mags
0 Power factor when underload :)
Thanks for precision, I will try this.
I have made some test with the amplifier, and look like when I use more turns at primary and low frequency (down to 30Hz) the light bulb is more and more bright (input was 24 Volts)...
It's curious also that we must isolate the two half look like a single shorted turn that disrupt the correct operation ?
About this my shield was very hot !!!
Quote from: SchubertReijiMaigo on August 22, 2011, 02:45:22 PM
Thanks for precision, I will try this.
I have made some test with the amplifier, and look like when I use more turns at primary and low frequency (down to 30Hz) the light bulb is more and more bright (input was 24 Volts)...
It's curious also that we must isolate the two half look like a single shorted turn that disrupt the correct operation ?
About this my shield was very hot !!!
Ya thats what happened I learned the hard way after about 5 times of rebuilding that they have to be isolated from each other. the eddys keep that magnetic field close to the skin of the shell as well so all the really good flux is right next to the shell. even tho it all gets fluxed cause its inside of the shell the really really good flux is right next to the shell.
If we pore our own mold and make the material low saturation in the middle core(s) area(s) and high saturation at the rest of the cores we should be able to make your configuration plausible Steven. Maybe we could use three cores with the middle being low saturation and the outer high saturation. I would think a core stacked model would be more efficient though. I see a new material to block magnetic fields has been developed, it will make cancelling back EMF easier unless we just use Thanes Hein's method to use it to our benefit (which sounds best). Old Man Lenz is out of the law business it would seem.
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Perepiteia_Generator_by_Potential_Difference_Inc explains how this works very well and we can all use this WORKING principle to build on now.
And the steel shell halves MUST be TOTALLY isolated from each other AND the windings.
Quote from: SchubertReijiMaigo on August 22, 2011, 10:21:00 AM
The outer shell is cold rolled steel, and inner is nanoperm (u=30000)
Primary is with at choice: 15/70/120/150turns for 12V 50Hz...
Secondary is 117 turns...
That looks like the same shell i bought! Could you tell me which nanoperm toroid you bought?
Awesome work so far!
Quote from: importfanatik on August 23, 2011, 12:42:01 AM
That looks like the same shell i bought! Could you tell me which nanoperm toroid you bought?
Awesome work so far!
If you will take a few minutes and read the topic you will see which nanoperm toroid brother. I do wish topic moderators would make a parts list and build instructions download available in the downloads section to make a quick study of their latest revisions.
Mav do you think you can do this? It will be a good step in organizing this working device which many members have keen interest in.
BTY - Stephan your appearance in that video shows me your very earnest and excited about our interests here. Right On!
@importfanatik:
it's a M116 core look at the PDF attached, the whole info is in.
Shield is a 7.5'' outer and 2.5'' inner it was bought at Ebay.
Wire is just wire that you have in our house because I have not magnet wire.
Today, I must unwind and isolate shell, maybe inner windings too for security reason (the device was hot I fear the insulation melted and make some short circuit with the shell).
Quote from: Hope on August 23, 2011, 02:13:38 AM
If you will take a few minutes and read the topic you will see which nanoperm toroid brother. I do wish topic moderators would make a parts list and build instructions download available in the downloads section to make a quick study of their latest revisions.
Mav do you think you can do this? It will be a good step in organizing this working device which many members have keen interest in.
BTY - Stephan your appearance in that video shows me your very earnest and excited about our interests here. Right On!
I'm busy making a triple core device ATM, to really separate the BMF, almost have a working model up and running, The configuration is a bit different but same principals plus a couple added benefits :)
like the device im always in constant flux :P
Mav
Quote from: Hope on August 23, 2011, 02:13:38 AM
If you will take a few minutes and read the topic you will see which nanoperm toroid brother.
Sorry, I thought he was using the same shell as me (4.5" OD), and therefore a smaller toroid.
Quote from: SchubertReijiMaigo on August 23, 2011, 04:59:09 AM
@importfanatik:
it's a M116 core look at the PDF attached, the whole info is in.
Shield is a 7.5'' outer and 2.5'' inner it was bought at Ebay.
Thanks
RE:
It look like I have some good news...
Test was with amplifier, at 24 Volts input.
Observation:
1) It seems the output power depend directly of the input current...
2) The secondary current seems to be constant at all load...
3) The best result was when I don't saturate the inner, (inner was at more or less 1 Tesla)...
4) Two test was made: one with 100 Hz and another with 250 Hz...
5) At 100 Hz the output the bulb more brighter than input bulb.
6) At 250 Hz the input bulb was off but the output was gloomy.
7) If I up frequency the output become darker.
8 ) It seems to have an asymmetric, unproportional current between input and output...
9) Traditional transformer windings ratio doesn't work here, 12V 100 turns will not turns into 24V 200 turns for example !!!
Hypothesis:
1) I think is better to not saturate the inner.
2) To increase output with no input, I think to wind more turns at secondary OR
3) The FE effect is not related to Heins effect but rather a phase difference between primary and secondary, more the shell is thick more you have phase difference, at 90° you can put any load you want the input will remain zero..
4) OR both phenomena described above...
Now Photos !!!
We have a Winner!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Now get some magnet wire, wrap your toroid till it fills the cavity, pull off x amount of amps and then in series pull out all the volts, then step it down.
In the bigger device 50 volts will = a amp or so in that range, not sure about your smaller guy there. As you can see tho you can get 1000's of volts with more turns on the secondary draw a couple of amps and then your in the realm of hoora!.
Good Job, I knew you guys could doit.
Mav
Quote from: SchubertReijiMaigo on August 23, 2011, 10:59:31 AM
3) The FE effect is not related to Heins effect but rather a phase difference between primary and secondary, more the shell is thick more you have phase difference, at 90° you can put any load you want the input will remain zero..
4) OR both phenomena described above...
Tesla wrote about this phase shift in his pat. ;]
Mags
Unfortunatly... it took 120 years for everyone else to catch on ;)
and wouldn't have even come to surface if well you know :P
Quote from: SchubertReijiMaigo on August 22, 2011, 10:21:00 AM
More test still needed and I plan to buy True RMS watts meter because measuring with light bulbs is not very accurate (you don't see if input is reactive or working current)...
Unless a true rms watt meter isn't that expensive you ought to get a nice DSO. They are much more versatile and useful in the long run. The cheapest multi channel DSO's is this one...
http://www.ebay.com/itm/4-Channel-ARM-DSO203-Nano-Pocket-Digital-Oscilloscope-/250830077865?pt=BI_Oscilloscopes&hash=item3a66a33fa9 (http://www.ebay.com/itm/4-Channel-ARM-DSO203-Nano-Pocket-Digital-Oscilloscope-/250830077865?pt=BI_Oscilloscopes&hash=item3a66a33fa9)
Quote from: SchubertReijiMaigo on August 23, 2011, 10:59:31 AM
RE:
It look like I have some good news...
Test was with amplifier, at 24 Volts input.
Observation:
1) It seems the output power depend directly of the input current...
2) The secondary current seems to be constant at all load...
3) The best result was when I don't saturate the inner, (inner was at more or less 1 Tesla)...
4) Two test was made: one with 100 Hz and another with 250 Hz...
5) At 100 Hz the output the bulb more brighter than input bulb.
6) At 250 Hz the input bulb was off but the output was gloomy.
7) If I up frequency the output become darker.
8 ) It seems to have an asymmetric, unproportional current between input and output...
9) Traditional transformer windings ratio doesn't work here, 12V 100 turns will not turns into 24V 200 turns for example !!!
Hypothesis:
1) I think is better to not saturate the inner.
2) To increase output with no input, I think to wind more turns at secondary OR
3) The FE effect is not related to Heins effect but rather a phase difference between primary and secondary, more the shell is thick more you have phase difference, at 90° you can put any load you want the input will remain zero..
4) OR both phenomena described above...
Now Photos !!!
Congratulations! I stand behind you.
WAY behind you in this Xformer development (but see photo of my electronics bench this morning -- at least I'm working on it, climbing the learning curve).
I have an ATTEN DSO, cost me about $350 including shipping (Ebay), shown in the photo.
QUESTION: what do you fellows think is the BEST way to make quantitative measurements of Power-in and Power-Out, for this device?
Quote from: JouleSeeker on August 23, 2011, 02:21:33 PM
QUESTION: what do you fellows think is the BEST way to make quantitative measurements of Power-in and Power-Out, for this device?
With your equipment it's quite simple. You can store the ATTEN dso data on some usb stick, load it in in a spreadsheet application, multiply current and voltage and determine the mean of the resulting graph. This will give you the exact real power irregardless of wave form or power factor. Do this for both input and output and you'll have your COP. You can share your data if you want others to double check the analysis.
Ahha!!!! Great news you bunch of winners, thanks from the rest of us who have been working alone side. Hooray!
Quote from: broli on August 23, 2011, 02:26:30 PM
With your equipment it's quite simple. You can store the ATTEN dso data on some usb stick, load it in in a spreadsheet application, multiply current and voltage and determine the mean of the resulting graph. This will give you the exact real power irregardless of wave form or power factor. Do this for both input and output and you'll have your COP. You can share your data if you want others to double check the analysis.
OK -- thanks, I can do this.
I was thinking of a "non-oscilloscope" method, but I think you're right that this may be the best way. My little ATTEN also has a "multiply" function which I've used to get the power from V(t)*I(t) for other circuits -- it shows the POWER = V(t)*I(t) waveform, but does not calculate mean or rms for you.... but I can compare areas! Also, I can use the spreadsheet method you describe.
@ Mags: Yeah I know this, I have read decade of times this patent LOL, I have the constant current at all load phenomena, now the deal is to test the two theories: The FE is when I have more and more voltage by winding turns at secondary, for example 12V 1 amp input 120Volts 1 amp output, or the phase difference, at 90° no matter load the input current will remain same (the BEMF help entirely the primary instead fighting...)
@ Mav: 120 years until someone reinvented something similar and test it, he he !
@ Broli, sorry I don't understand how to measure accurately the power with a DSO, I 'am not skilled at this, but investigate to buy the cheap DSO in the link above...
Quote from: SchubertReijiMaigo on August 23, 2011, 03:34:05 PM
@ Mags: Yeah I know this, I have read decade of times this patent LOL, I have the constant current at all load phenomena, now the deal is to test the two theories: The FE is when I have more and more voltage by winding turns at secondary, for example 12V 1 amp input 120Volts 1 amp output, or the phase difference, at 90° no matter load the input current will remain same (the BEMF help entirely the primary instead fighting...)
@ Mav: 120 years until someone reinvented something similar and test it, he he !
@ Broli, sorry I don't understand how to measure accurately the power with a DSO, I 'am not skilled at this, but investigate to buy the cheap DSO in the link above...
;)
Please write this up as far as specs, build instructions and parts list of at least one working model. Include the principles as found. I have done technical writing for a major manufacture of electronics/mechanical equipment and would help if you wish. We can place this document in the downloads area so as to make it easy to get it to members who will build theirs. Thank you.
Is this your wish?
Is this for us all?
Richard
Quote from: SchubertReijiMaigo on August 23, 2011, 10:59:31 AM
RE:
It look like I have some good news...
Test was with amplifier, at 24 Volts input.
Observation:
1) It seems the output power depend directly of the input current...
2) The secondary current seems to be constant at all load...
3) The best result was when I don't saturate the inner, (inner was at more or less 1 Tesla)...
4) Two test was made: one with 100 Hz and another with 250 Hz...
5) At 100 Hz the output the bulb more brighter than input bulb.
6) At 250 Hz the input bulb was off but the output was gloomy.
7) If I up frequency the output become darker.
8 ) It seems to have an asymmetric, unproportional current between input and output...
9) Traditional transformer windings ratio doesn't work here, 12V 100 turns will not turns into 24V 200 turns for example !!!
Hypothesis:
1) I think is better to not saturate the inner.
2) To increase output with no input, I think to wind more turns at secondary OR
3) The FE effect is not related to Heins effect but rather a phase difference between primary and secondary, more the shell is thick more you have phase difference, at 90° you can put any load you want the input will remain zero..
4) OR both phenomena described above...
Now Photos !!!
Your message sheds light on Walter Russell's note that gravity was at a 90 degree opposition to current flow. FINALLY!!!
If anyone is interested to make independent verification and for backup data about this experiment:
I post the exp. data I use here:
1) Take a Nanoperm Magnetec toroid a M116 one (u=30000).
2) Take a cold rolled steel shell at
http://shop.ebay.com/i.html?_kw=steel&_kw=donut (http://shop.ebay.com/i.html?_kw=steel&_kw=donut)
the 7.5'' outer / 2.5'' inner version, vendor was: eworldsales1
3) Cut it in two half properly, avoid the gap between them, drill two small hole (2.5mm) for the wire secondary can pass through the outer shell.
4) Isolate the two half to avoid Eddy. (Eddy will create losses, make it less efficient and overheat the shell (single shorted turn effect)...
5) Wind secondary, mine was 117 turns exactly...
6) Put this secondary into the two half, put the wire in the two hole, and close it, no gap should be here (I wonder if the gap is important or no ?).
7) Start to wind primary, mine was with several input:
Winding A: 70
Winding B: 25
Winding C: 25
Winding D: 21
Winding E: 15
For a total of 156 turns. My test was at this number, Boucherot formula will give me around 1 Tesla magnetisation (including shell )...
8 ) Input was 12 VAC 50 Hz, or 24 VAC with amplifier and frequency generator.
9) The load and input bulb was car headlight bulb, 12 Volts with two filament 40 watts and 45 watts, use only one filament and the same for both bulbs, in my test it was the horizontal filament...
10) Input bulb is on series with primary, load is at secondary...
11) Play with the device, (frequency, voltage, turns) you should observe non linear characteristic and disproportional input/output current...
12) For improving output: two theories at this time:
A) Increase number of turns at secondary.
b) Increase phase difference by a thicker shell (need to build another device with a new shell...)
C) Both phenomena...
13) Enjoy !!! SchubertReijiMaigo 08/24/2011.
What would be a metglas equivalent part number, these are rated at 1.56 tesalas? I mean which part number would best fit which steel doughnut?
Quote from: SchubertReijiMaigo on August 24, 2011, 04:51:20 AM
If anyone is interested to make independent verification and for backup data about this experiment:
I post the exp. data I use here:
1) Take a Nanoperm Magnetec toroid a M116 one (u=30000).
2) Take a cold rolled steel shell at
http://shop.ebay.com/i.html?_kw=steel&_kw=donut (http://shop.ebay.com/i.html?_kw=steel&_kw=donut)
the 7.5'' outer / 2.5'' inner version, vendor was: eworldsales1
3) Cut it in two half properly, avoid the gap between them, drill two small hole (2.5mm) for the wire secondary can pass through the outer shell.
4) Isolate the two half to avoid Eddy. (Eddy will create losses, make it less efficient and overheat the shell (single shorted turn effect)...
5) Wind secondary, mine was 117 turns exactly...
6) Put this secondary into the two half, put the wire in the two hole, and close it, no gap should be here (I wonder if the gap is important or no ?).
7) Start to wind primary, mine was with several input:
Winding A: 70
Winding B: 25
Winding C: 25
Winding D: 21
Winding E: 15
For a total of 156 turns. My test was at this number, Boucherot formula will give me around 1 Tesla magnetisation (including shell )...
8 ) Input was 12 VAC 50 Hz, or 24 VAC with amplifier and frequency generator.
9) The load and input bulb was car headlight bulb, 12 Volts with two filament 40 watts and 45 watts, use only one filament and the same for both bulbs, in my test it was the horizontal filament...
10) Input bulb is on series with primary, load is at secondary...
11) Play with the device, (frequency, voltage, turns) you should observe non linear characteristic and disproportional input/output current...
12) For improving output: two theories at this time:
A) Increase number of turns at secondary.
b) Increase phase difference by a thicker shell (need to build another device with a new shell...)
C) Both phenomena...
13) Enjoy !!! SchubertReijiMaigo 08/24/2011.
SRM -- thank you very much for sharing the details in a plain and organized manner. I would like to try a replication also -- and I'm eagerly awaiting results from Clanzers.
Three questions:
1. What gauge wire did you use for the secondary, and for the primary?
2. How did you measure the phase difference?
3. How did you measure the input power, and the output power?
Thanks again -- very exciting work.
StevenEJones
COOL BLUE® Cores to reduce motor-bearing currents
COOL BLUE® toroids made from the
nano-crystalline core material
NANOPERM® are being used increasingly
to reduce damaging
motor bearing currents in modern high power inverter systems operating at high
switching frequencies. As a result of these unwanted currents, the bearings corrugate,
leading to electrical breakdown in the lubrication and finally to a standstill of the entire
motor.
The use of COOL BLUE® cores not only significantly reduces the over voltage peaks at
the motor terminals, but also suppresses the asymmetrical EMI currents which are
generated by the parasitic capacities of the motor itself together with the motor cable.
In order to achieve an efficient reduction in these destructive effects, one or more
COOL BLUE® cores of suitable geometry have to be placed together over the
connector cables in the DC-link as well as at the inverter output. In this configuration,
the cores operate as a common-mode choke.
This method significantly increases the service life of the motor bearings and thus
reduces maintenance costs and standstill periods.
Core fixing: Cased in plastic box (material UL listed, file no. QMFZ2 E41938)
Standard range
Type Bare Core Size
od x id x h [mm]
Fixed Core Size
OD x ID x H [mm]
lfe
[cm]
afe
[cm2]
Al @ 10kHz
[μH]
Isat*
[A]
Webshop
TYPE Bare Core Size mm Fixed Core Size mm ife afe Al@10KHz/Uh Isat
M-112 63 x 50 x 30 68 x 43 x 36 17,7 1,44 23,3 - 46,6 4
M-649 63 x 50 x 30 OVAL 17,7 1,44 23,3 - 46,6 4 -
M-378 75 x 50 x 30 80 x 43 x 36 19,4 2,78 37,3 - 74,6 5 -
M-113 80 x 63 x 30 85 x 57 x 35,5 22,4 1,86 24,1 - 48,2 6
M-283 80 x 63 x 30 OVAL 22,4 1,86 24,1 - 48,2 6
M-114 100 x 80 x 30 105 x 75 x 35 28,2 2,25 22,5 - 45,0 8
M-284 100 x 80 x 30 OVAL 28,2 2,25 22,5 - 45,0 8
M-142 130 x 100 x 20 OVAL 37,0 2,12 16,0 - 32,0 9
M-115 130 x 100 x 30 135 x 94 x 34 35,9 3,33 24,6 - 52,9 9
M-116 160 x 130 x 30 165 x 123 x 34 45,4 3,24 20,9 - 45,0 12
M-302 160 x 130 x 30 OVAL 44,7 3,30 20,9 - 45,0 12
M-117 200 x 175 x 30 208 x 166 x 37 58,8 2,74 12,3 - 24,6 16
M-111 236,5 x 201 x 30 OVAL 69,6 3,94 14,5 - 29,9 20
M-248 300 x 254 x 30 OVAL 87,1 5,20 15,8 - 31,5 22
M-205 300 x 254 x 30 304 x 246 x 36 87,1 5,20 15,8 - 31,5 22
M-503 500 x 450 x 30 513 x 437 x 37 149 5,60 8,0 - 20,0 40
* Saturation Current (peak value) at 1 turn
®NANOPERM; ®COOL BLUE: Registered trademarks of MAGNETEC GmbH
2010 MAR 31 / Page 4
This is just a page from their catalog folks to show you options
Here is their link in Germany But there is one in New Jersey also.
http://www.coolbluecores.com/magnetec.htm
SRM, I posted your specs and build info in the downloads section so members could print them easily. Happy buildings all!
QuoteThree questions:
1. What gauge wire did you use for the secondary, and for the primary?
2. How did you measure the phase difference?
3. How did you measure the input power, and the output power?
Thanks again -- very exciting work.
StevenEJones
1) 1.5mm^2 or 15 or 16 AWG
2) Not measured yet, I don't have scope... (read Tesla patent and his similar device).
3) Nor measure but rather a visual measurement (light bulb brilliance) if the input is off and output is bright or gloomy you have something abnormal (FE)...
Now the next step is increase output power...
I am looking for a nanoperm core to build on. Please send me the type # you have and I will contact you and payment can be arranged. I would like shipping asap. I just talked to Magnetec in NJ and they have ONE M428 in stock that is 300X254X30 but with shipping it is over 900 bucks. That is WAY over my piggy bank while I am facing some challenges. But it is somewhere near 9-10 lbs core at 1.2 Tesla's. Made for power application. That core would really be awesome to proto-type with and would be the largest build yet. I best be looking at the SJones build of the M116 variety or something on that order. Line upon line, is my normal building cycle nowdays. I think the creator wants this technology to come forth for the benefit of mankind at this time and hope you my brothers will remember that this world is just temporal. Are decisions are eternal.
http://www.coolbluecores.com/magnetec.htm
if you need this link
You may contact me at arttam54@yahoo.com
Costs come way down with quanity purchasing and I will be getting those figures tomorrow email from NJ soon. They were friendly and helpful.
14 gauge wire is rated at 15 amps
12 gauge wire is rated at 20 amps
10 gauge at 30 amps
08 gauge at 40 amps
this is national electrical code.
Volts times Amps = WATTS
*Attention: As you strip ANY wire DO NOT nick the wire it changes the amp rating lower. Strip with the correct wire gauge tool of the correct size.
Edited (too many times to count)
Quote from: SchubertReijiMaigo on August 24, 2011, 03:14:29 PM
1) 1.5mm^2 or 15 or 16 AWG
2) Not measured yet, I don't have scope... (read Tesla patent and his similar device).
3) Nor measure but rather a visual measurement (light bulb brilliance) if the input is off and output is bright or gloomy you have something abnormal (FE)...
Now the next step is increase output power...
Thank you for your frank and helpful answers, SRM. If you lived closer, I would be happy to run over with my oscilloscope and meters and
measure the phase differences (under different conditions) and the input and output power.
(Actually, where do you live? I live in Utah in the USA.) I will feel
a lot better when these important values are measured quantitatively.Hope (Richard), I appreciate your enthusiasm for this Gabriel device -- which I share.
And Clanzers... still eagerly waiting for your results! and other replicators. I have ordered components.
Exciting times...
Hello SchubertReijiMaigo,
Number 10) is posing a problem:
Input-Lamp is in series
I never use lamps for these measurements because they are nonlinear in currentdraw.
I always use power-resitors, in this case I would use 2 identical 10-Ohm resistors.
Next you need a scope for measuring power-factor of input
Channel A - Probe directly to input terminal of primary coil
Channel B - Probe at the point between resistor and the other terminal of primary-coil
Mass of probe on the resistor-side to ground.
Where is a possible mistake ? You have to measure the ohm-resistance of the Input-Coil since it is in series with your lamp. So you have a voltage-divider ( coil-resitance and lamp-resistance) and it could be possible that your primary coil is converting current to heat thus resulting in a lower voltage-drop across your input-lamp in comparison to the voltage across the output-lamp. You have to measure the current in the primary and measure the voltage-drop across the lamp and only then do you know the true power being the sum of both lamp and coil.
Regards
Kator01
Quote from: Kator01 on August 24, 2011, 09:07:58 PM
Hello SchubertReijiMaigo,
Number 10) is posing a problem:
Input-Lamp is in series
I never use lamps for these measurements because they are nonlinear in currentdraw.
I always use power-resitors, in this case I would use 2 identical 10-Ohm resistors.
Next you need a scope for measuring power-factor of input
Channel A - Probe directly to input terminal of primary coil
Channel B - Probe at the point between resistor and the other terminal of primary-coil
Mass of probe on the resistor-side to ground.
Where is a possible mistake ? You have to measure the ohm-resistance of the Input-Coil since it is in series with your lamp. So you have a voltage-divider ( coil-resitance and lamp-resistance) and it could be possible that your primary coil is converting current to heat thus resulting in a lower voltage-drop across your input-lamp in comparison to the voltage across the output-lamp. You have to measure the current in the primary and measure the voltage-drop across the lamp and only then do you know the true power being the sum of both lamp and coil.
Regards
Kator01
Not in particular, with a DSO you could measure source voltage and current across a shunt resistor, that will give you two phase shifted sine waves which you can multiply and determine the mean of giving you real power. No need to add up stuff or know the resistance of the coil (of course you need to know the shunt resistance to calculate current).
Has anyone tried stacking two Nanoperms vertically in the secondary to see what effect this increased core has ? It may require some less windings in the primary ?
@JouleSeeker:
QuoteThank you for your frank and helpful answers, SRM. If you lived closer, I would be happy to run over with my oscilloscope and meters and measure the phase differences (under different conditions) and the input and output power.
(Actually, where do you live? I live in Utah in the USA.) I will feel a lot better when these important values are measured quantitatively.
OK, yes me too, but unfortunately, I live rather in a very small town in France countryside...
@Kator01: Yeah I know it's a crude measurement, this is why I have posted with a bulb bright and the input bulb off, if the input bulb is dark, you have no or a very small current that flow in, that mean the impedance of the primary is very high like an unloaded conventional trafo !!! But output have something and not in the microwatts range... See ohms law about this, the primary is look like two "resistor in series" one is variable (the primary coil).
@Broli:
QuoteNot in particular, with a DSO you could measure source voltage and current across a shunt resistor, that will give you two phase shifted sine waves which you can multiply and determine the mean of giving you real power. No need to add up stuff or know the resistance of the coil (of course you need to know the shunt resistance to calculate current).
With this method can you measure ugly sine wave (harmonics) especially saturated trafos precisely ?
@ All: I have bought 2kg of 16 AWG wire, I have the intention to wind more turns as possible at secondary to see what happens.
Protocol of this experiment will be the same except an high voltage secondary...
Quote from: SchubertReijiMaigo on August 25, 2011, 05:55:38 AM
@Broli:
With this method can you measure ugly sine wave (harmonics) especially saturated trafos precisely ?
Yes this method will give you the mean (real power) of ANY
periodic wave form no matter how "ugly" it is, unlike the root mean square method which is only useful for ideal sine waves.
It's calculated and displayed automatically or you need use complex formula ?
Some models does this for you ?
I have asked my self countless times "how can we use this endless sea of energy we are afloat in"? We can't if we are moving with it because there is not potential difference. That is why the zero point is so very important. Example: We have a barge with a large paddle wheel generator built on it and we are afloat on a swift endless river. We can do work on the barge and have that works benefits BUT the generator is useless for the most part UNTIL we somehow anchor to a non moving shore (the zero point). Walter Russell's charts show us the cycle of all that is created and the point of creation and the point of utter destruction (the zero point) is noted. So how do we attach to it? We are on the threshold of solving this. Understanding the actions of this Gabriel device will show us this attaching mechanism. What a fitting name you have chosen Mavendex, for it also explains why we are placed here on this world. It explains why there needs be opposition in all things.
This zero point may be made or collected and perhaps that is what Ed Leedskalin's wheel did. Notice the magnets all pointed outward which made the center of those magnets all point inward. When he cause movement in the wheel he created a zero point in the center of the wheel which was collected within the iron mass below (old cast iron engine block). So he could then draw from the sea of energy thru his "windings and air capacitors" to filter what he needed (which kind of charge). I know this is off topic but it is the overall key to the sea of energy if my thoughts on this are correct. The nicest part of zero point is that it attracts ALL the energies of every type. So Zero Point Energy is the wrong term, it should be called just The Zero Point or The Null perhaps.
This is a supplier of a superior grade of magnet wire and its COATINGS are rated to 200C (392F) which will help if we are experimenting and get unexpected heat processes. Their prices are the best I have found for the quality presented.
http://www.powerwerx.com/wire-cable/magnet-wire.html?gclid=CNPP7rf56qoCFYcZQgod0ANJNw
First sorry for the partial repost but it is part of saved text document.
This zero point may be made or collected and perhaps that is what Ed Leedskalin's wheel did. Notice the magnets all pointed outward which made the center of those magnets all point inward. When he cause movement in the wheel he created a zero point in the center of the wheel which was collected within the iron mass below (old cast iron engine block). So he could then draw from the sea of energy thru his "windings and air capacitors" to filter what he needed (which kind of charge) He was going to use the zero point to attract or nullify. I know this is off topic but it is the overall key to the sea of energy if my thoughts on this are correct. The nicest part of zero point is that it attracts ALL the energies of every type. So Zero Point Energy is the wrong term, it should be called just The Zero Point or The Null perhaps.
What I mean by "it collects or attracts energies of every type" is all energies (positive or negative for instance..heat or cold..etc). Which make me think positive or negative charges are the same thing only our reference point is at a cental point between them so we see them as either positive or negative in reference to our charge or wavelength.
I have a power measurement question.
I made a replication of the idea from materials I had available, a couple half-donuts from some ikea furniture, stainless steel, and a toroid I got from Metglas last year.
Question: Is measuring voltage over a load (on output) sufficient to calculate power consumed, when the load is the only thing in the output circuit? I just have a 10 ohm resistor on the secondary. I made a crude picture of my setup. Would I use ohms law, V/R = I to get current, so 20V / 100 ohms = 200mA. Then P = I^2 * R to get power, so .2A * .2A * 100Ohms = 4 watts?
Side note + horror story == chuckle: They shipped me these two tiny toroids as samples when I requested them, I just had to give them my fedex shipping account so I could pay for the shipment itself. Toroid's were free, however overnight shipping from Japan (which I did not ask for) was $250. And that's $250 last year, when the dollar was worth more! So when dealing with these companies, if you give your shipping account information, specify HOW you want it shipped. lol
Quote from: void109 on August 25, 2011, 01:36:45 PM
Question: Is measuring voltage over a load (on output) sufficient to calculate power consumed, when the load is the only thing in the output circuit? I just have a 10 ohm resistor on the secondary. I made a crude picture of my setup. Would I use ohms law, V/R = I to get current, so 20V / 100 ohms = 200mA. Then P = I^2 * R to get power, so .2A * .2A * 100Ohms = 4 watts?
Yes, but only if you are very certain of the resistance and the coil's resistance is significantly lower than the load's resistance. If not then you just add the coil's resistance in the power equation, this will give you only more output power so showing OU without it would only enforce your case.
Thanks for the quick reply broli. In that case, I'll get meticulous with measurements, take pictures and such, create a better diagram to post.
Does anyone have results (in watts) for this Gabriel device for input Power and P-output that can be shared?
Also, SRM and others -- what direction did you wind your primary and secondary windings, CW or CCW?
Finally, did you wind using single-winding or (Tesla's) bifilar-winding method?
Regarding the differences in magnetic field caused by single-wound versus bifilar-wound, I just posted some results on another thread where these windings are being discussed (among other things) -- some may find these DATA (not speculation) interesting:
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=10773.msg298830#msg298830
Thanks again for the lively, open-source discussion.
StevenEJones
@ Steve:
Winding was BOTH CW and the turns direction was outer to inner of the toroid (when you wind you can wind to exterior or interior of the toroid for a same direction: here CW)...
Bifilar will just give you another conventional winding not special effect with this --> If you put the two coil in series you can decrease frequency by two, or raise the voltage by two, same thing with secondary except here will get (maybe) more power at secondary.
Maybe also trying this week to wind with two different current direction to see what happen.
SRM.
Quote from: SchubertReijiMaigo on August 26, 2011, 05:35:16 AM
@ Steve:
Winding was BOTH CW and the turns direction was outer to inner of the toroid (when you wind you can wind to exterior or interior of the toroid for a same direction: here CW)...
Bifilar will just give you another conventional winding not special effect with this --> If you put the two coil in series you can decrease frequency by two, or raise the voltage by two, same thing with secondary except here will get (maybe) more power at secondary.
Maybe also trying this week to wind with two different current direction to see what happen.
SRM.
It would be interesting to see what would happen with that, two different directions, SRM -- thanks for the replies and for your creativity!
I also appreciate the photos you provided; very helpful.
Steve
Quote from: JouleSeeker on August 26, 2011, 07:13:03 AM
It would be interesting to see what would happen with that, two different directions, SRM -- thanks for the replies and for your creativity!
I also appreciate the photos you provided; very helpful.
Steve
causes issues when you wind against itself, at least thats my experience :) give it a go tho!
Hmm, you mean it don't work ?, OMG I just nearly finished (just 35 turns to complete my 156 primary) to wind the primary like this, But I think it worth to try it also !!! :)
Quote from: SchubertReijiMaigo on August 26, 2011, 10:07:41 AM
Hmm, you mean it don't work ?, OMG I just nearly finished (just 35 turns to complete my 156 primary) to wind the primary like this, But I think it worth to try it also !!! :)
It reflected on me when I did that but hey your on the otherside of the world so you never know :D
Give it a go and let me know I just dropped 1600 feet of 21 awg on this M-117, Ill have it in the shell after I edit up some video and make a commercial for the church :) Good luck!
Quote from: Mavendex on August 26, 2011, 11:26:07 AM
...I just dropped 1600 feet of 21 awg on this M-117, Ill have it in the shell after I edit up some video and make a commercial for the church :) Good luck!
Very much looking forward to your results, Mav! Seems like most are using 16 AWG wire... any reason you went with 21AWG? Also,
is your shell one of the "exhaust manifold donuts", soft steel? I wonder if there is something out there with higher magnetic permeability...
I like this toroid-within-a-toroid design -- very intriguing approach. Best wishes on your build!
Steve
Quote from: JouleSeeker on August 26, 2011, 01:00:22 PM
Very much looking forward to your results, Mav!
Seems like most are using 16 AWG wire... any reason you went with 21AWG? Also, is your shell one of the "exhaust manifold donuts", soft steel? I wonder if there is something out there with higher magnetic permeability...
I like this toroid-within-a-toroid design -- very intriguing approach. Best wishes on your build!
Steve
I wanted to see if mass had anything to do with the formula, so we have more turns on the secondary which will give us more voltage, less mass to magnetize which should help in lowering overall input and mabye (increase output), just a hypothesis. 1 or 2 amps and 1000 volts :) The magnetic field has to go somewhere it just doesn't stop going :)
The Shell is the one I had made at L&S same steel stuff, it works I like it. More sooner than later we will get our permalloy shell done up, they are such pains sometimes to get a one off done.
Hey Mav
Ive gotten some materials in to give the tube style idea a go. ;]
It would be good if it has any hope, due to easier builds and especially while experimenting.
Just wanted to ask. What is the lowest no. of turns on the sec have you tried? Just wondered as being that the ratios do not end up with conventional transformers, if having lower sec, is the voltage out the same as many more turns? Amps? Im thinking with less turns, there may be less saturation of the inner core, possibly allowing more sec current while keeping away from the primary.
Just got done fiddling with a peltier chip project, 3 amp 12v. I tell ya what, 60w 12v 5a total to run the chip and 2 newer style cpu sinks w/ fans, it blows some cold air. Lunch box a/c . My buddy is considering scaling up for his Montycarlo.
Mags
Clanzer is working on a replication also, it's especially worth a look because David K. provided us with some pictures of his build at various stages :
http://www.overunity.org.uk/showthread.php?2495-Two-Toroid-Over-Unity-Gabriel-Device
@ All: just finished to wind my 35 turns...
Made some test at 12 VAC 50 Hz, in short the result was exactly the same of the precedent EXP...
Some remind of the protocol (Vers 1.3)
1) Same turns number primary and secondary.
2) Same bulbs and same filament...
3) Same input generator (test with amplifier will be tomorrow, because now I'm tired and the end of the day...)
4) Winding is BOTH CW, BUT winding direction is different (the inner core is toward the INTERIOR and the outer core is toward the EXTERIOR...)
So like Mav said above a version with high voltage will be preferred, if not then phase difference phenomena and increase thickness shell, I wait for my 2kg 16 AWG magnet wire...
@ Mav: 1600 feet by hand: a new record 8)
You should be have a high voltage here, but did you notice the poor voltage regulation at the secondary if you place a heavy load voltage start to droop, if you place more heavy load or short circuit the primary start to draw some current also !!!
@ Mag:
QuoteIm thinking with less turns, there may be less saturation of the inner core, possibly allowing more sec current while keeping away from the primary.
Common mistake about trafo: no, less turns into primary will saturate the inner also, because of the nature of AC input which is totally different from DC magnetisation, more turns = more inductance = more impedance = lesser current = lesser magnetisation of the core...
And saturation of the inner core give me bad result with my current version (more current flowing in the primary bulb than the secondary one then wasted energy)
@Mags
its more of a trade off from what I gather on the secondary turns, its like watt tradeing, x amount of volts will transfer in to x amount of amps up to when you run out of voltage to trade. By stepping up your voltage it seems you can pull some good amps but the smaller the wire you go well then the less amps you can handle.
With 3.5 ohms of 14 gauge wire I was able to create 7 amps at 110 volts on the secondary which made the transformer about 78%, but if you just draw 2.5 amps and increase power the voltage will fly high and you will go over cause your not causing anymore bmf with the increased amperage out. Its strictly magnetisim, so to counter BEMF cause the nanoperm can only hold so much we lower our current and stack on volts. and volts play a small part in the magnetic environment.
same length of secondary with 16 guage about 5.2ohms, Slightly different voltage to amperage trade off is there but now you have a ton more voltage to play with, still can't seem to hit that magic mark of 1000 volts.
So now Im trying that with 21 gauge about 17.8 ohms it should handle 2 amps or so and dropping on the same length of wire, if the case is true then we can scale down the model and possibly get some high temp wire and go for like 10k volts and a couple of amps.
Nice to hear about the ac in a box that is exciting :)
Quote from: SchubertReijiMaigo on August 26, 2011, 02:17:49 PM
@ All: just finished to wind my 35 turns...
Made some test at 12 VAC 50 Hz, in short the result was exactly the same of the precedent EXP...
Some remind of the protocol (Vers 1.3)
1) Same turns number primary and secondary.
2) Same bulbs and same filament...
3) Same input generator (test with amplifier will be tomorrow, because now I'm tired and the end of the day...)
4) Winding is BOTH CW, BUT winding direction is different (the inner core is toward the INTERIOR and the outer core is toward the EXTERIOR...)
So like Mav said above a version with high voltage will be preferred, if not then phase difference phenomena and increase thickness shell, I wait for my 2kg 16 AWG magnet wire...
@ Mav: 1600 feet by hand: a new record 8)
You should be have a high voltage here, but did you notice the poor voltage regulation at the secondary if you place a heavy load voltage start to droop, if you place more heavy load or short circuit the primary start to draw some current also !!!
@ Mag:
Common mistake about trafo: no, less turns into primary will saturate the inner also, because of the nature of AC input which is totally different from DC magnetisation, more turns = more inductance = more impedance = lesser current = lesser magnetisation of the core...
And saturation of the inner core give me bad result with my current version (more current flowing in the primary bulb than the secondary one then wasted energy)
I thought you were counterwinding the coils, one clockwise and one ccw. good test!
Also yes I did notice how the trade got worse as the more amps you pulled, but when you get your meter you will see that the heavier the load on the secondary your powerfactor will drop also or make it more reactive it least thats the way it works with what ive been useing. If you add turns to the primary it will also lower the powerfactor or make it more reactive.
This might be an experiment that doesn't tell that much but I'm curious to know what the inductance difference would be between just measuring the inductance on the outer coil and measuring the same coil while you saturate the inner coil with DC current.
@ Mav:
QuoteI thought you were counterwinding the coils, one clockwise and one ccw. good test tho
No, sorry, I' will test it also CW inner CCW outer, but both exterior toward interior (since it doesn't make effect...)
SRM.
Who needs a nano perm core? I DO! The NJ Magnetec office will make good deals on orders over single pieces, so perhaps we can order thru some trusted mate here at OU. They should be willing to collect the monies first along with our request (s) and make a group order. Shipping should be (make sure of this) ground and make sure of handling rates BEFORE you place the order(s).?? Any volunteers? The M417 is nearly one hundred dollars off when ordering in multiple quantities. So it is in our best interests to order in volume. BTY these cores Currie temp is 600C but operating recommended at 137C.
http://www.powerwerx.com/wire-cable/magnet-wire.html?gclid=CNPP7rf56qoCFYcZQgod0ANJNw
this wire outlet is selling superior grades of magnet wire.
Thanks to Mavendex (Dave) the shell arrived this week.
Now just got to sort out a insulator for both halves and wind that beast of a primary on the devil!!
Cheers
Sean.
Clanzer, Please tell us your M-417 wire gauge sizes and info specs for the inner and outer cores, and how the cores were wound. Number of winds per core and all if possible. Did you weigh the nano perm before and after the winds? Thank you.
I have been told that teflon tape is good up to 400F temp for insulating the doughnuts from each other
Quote from: Magluvin on August 26, 2011, 01:15:10 PM
Hey Mav
Ive gotten some materials in to give the tube style idea a go. ;]
It would be good if it has any hope, due to easier builds and especially while experimenting.
[snip]
Mags
I think this is a great idea,
Mags! Tube style... Can you tell us what materials you used, especially for the inner core with high magnetic permeability? source? would be great! Did you use a ferrite rod?
I'm finding that as I search for high-permeability toroidal cores, the manufacturers are in Germany and China... NONE in the USA! I rather hope I'm wrong -- has anyone found a manufacturer in the US?
PS -- the supplier in the USA for larger nanocrystalline cores has run out of the largest ones they carry, 10 cm is on back-order, 4-6 weeks delay for delivery (from China presumably):
http://www.cwsbytemark.com/index.php?main_page=index&cPath=206
Quote from: Hope on August 26, 2011, 03:33:49 PM
Clanzer, Please tell us your M-417 wire gauge sizes and info specs for the inner and outer cores, and how the cores were wound. Number of winds per core and all if possible. Did you weigh the nano perm before and after the winds? Thank you.
Hi Hope
On the M417 there is approx 2000 winds of 16AWG (approx 1.3mm)
16 awg 4.0156 Kohms per 1000 feet (.00473 per ft) 7.8177 pounds (3.5kg) = 1000ft
I worked out roughly 116mm's per turn
So 116 * 2000 = 232000 mm's
convert to inches
232000 /25.4 = 9133 inches
Convert to feet
9133 /12 = 761 feet
So resistance is .00473 per foot * 761 = 3.6 ohms
So around 3.5 kg of wire.
I ordered 4kg and still got some left over and ended up with 3.5 ohms. So pretty close.
Outer core is 9AWG (approx 3mm)
9AWG we will need about 350 feet, which works out a massive 6kg if my calculations are correct:
9AWG = 39.630 lbs = 1000ft, so 0.03963 lb per foot
1lb = 0.45359237kg
so 350ft * 0.03963 =13.87 lbs
13.87lbs = 6.3 kg
Again I ordered 4kg and plan to wind all of it and see what we end up with.
Did not weigh the nanoperm before winding but I am sure the weight is probably on the spec sheet somewhere.
Cheers
Sean.
Quote from: Magluvin on August 26, 2011, 01:15:10 PM
Hey Mav
Ive gotten some materials in to give the tube style idea a go. ;]
It would be good if it has any hope, due to easier builds and especially while experimenting.
Mags
Ya what did you get? I was only useing a galvanized steel tube with a made in china Iron stake... Can't even buy a iron stake made in America thats pretty bad.
@ Clanzer: where do you have bought this shell ? Your version look like greater than mine, and you can wind a lot of turns, this version look like to have potential to produce more power. You live in US or Europe ?
I found some iron wire at an Ace hardware that seemed to be very attractive(had to buy) to the magnets I brought with me. ;] Looks to be maybe 28awg, compared to some 26 awg I have here. measured .022in. and the 26awg measured .025. I left the packaging at work. Ill get the info on Monday as to what and who on the wire. It was $4.99.
Also, JB weld is magnetic. The 2 part squeeze tubes, the "steel" is, the hardener isnt. But the JB weld epoxy putty stick, like a filled tootsie roll, both parts are magnetic.
The JB weld products are not magnetic champions to say the least. But Im sure more iron can be added to it. Im using it to be the foundation for my wire cores. Im figuring and devising ways(tools) to make the cores neat and consistent. And the JB should help fill tiny gaps between wires.
First Im making a rig to straighten lengths of the wire. Then the wire pieces get thin coats of spray paint then dry, and cut to length.
Its just a way of doin my own thing. If the wire cores worked for tesla, Im game.
Im going to make the inner core tomorrow and see how it works as a core. Once I consider and wind it, ill cover the sec. with a thin layer of flat plastic film, like bubble pack plastic but thin. Then make my outer core on that so it will slide off when dry. This way my proximity will be good with changeability. ;] Ill come up with better ways as I go.
Im going for small here. Not worried about killowatts till I know we got it all down pat. Plus it costs a lot to go big at first.
Im thinking a 1/2 in. dia core 3 to 4 in long. After it dries I can level the ends off if need be.
Im considering making 1, 2 and 3 layer outer cores just to get it over with then play. I think it will be a good project.
And I will be using an old school Soundstream amp to drive it using the pc as a signal. Fun Fun Fun. ;]
Mags
Quote from: Magluvin on August 26, 2011, 07:56:29 PM
I found some iron wire at an Ace hardware that seemed to be very attractive(had to buy) to the magnets I brought with me. ;] Looks to be maybe 28awg, compared to some 26 awg I have here. measured .022in. and the 26awg measured .025. I left the packaging at work. Ill get the info on Monday as to what and who on the wire. It was $4.99.
Also, JB weld is magnetic. The 2 part squeeze tubes, the "steel" is, the hardener isnt. But the JB weld epoxy putty stick, like a filled tootsie roll, both parts are magnetic.
The JB weld products are not magnetic champions to say the least. But Im sure more iron can be added to it. Im using it to be the foundation for my wire cores. Im figuring and devising ways(tools) to make the cores neat and consistent. And the JB should help fill tiny gaps between wires.
First Im making a rig to straighten lengths of the wire. Then the wire pieces get thin coats of spray paint then dry, and cut to length.
Its just a way of doin my own thing. If the wire cores worked for tesla, Im game.
Im going to make the inner core tomorrow and see how it works as a core. Once I consider and wind it, ill cover the sec. with a thin layer of flat plastic film, like bubble pack plastic but thin. Then make my outer core on that so it will slide off when dry. This way my proximity will be good with changeability. ;] Ill come up with better ways as I go.
Im going for small here. Not worried about killowatts till I know we got it all down pat. Plus it costs a lot to go big at first.
Im thinking a 1/2 in. dia core 3 to 4 in long. After it dries I can level the ends off if need be.
Im considering making 1, 2 and 3 layer outer cores just to get it over with then play. I think it will be a good project.
And I will be using an old school Soundstream amp to drive it using the pc as a signal. Fun Fun Fun. ;]
Mags
If you wanna go for a mix of yum yum domains to play with, I would go halves with you on http://www.vivenano.com/MagnetiteSpecs.pdf just add water then add the jbweld mix to it for any application.
its 500 bones but we get 50 grams a piece of some surfactant in place non aggregating ferrofluid that's not combustible.
Looks like good stuff. Not sure the function of the water. Will have too look more into it.
From what I understand, if we have perfect permeability in the core, the field caused by the wire will ALL be attracted to the core, no expansion beyond the core.
Makes me wonder if we are working with anything close to it ever. If what is said is correct, if we wound a coil on a cylinder core, would there be an external N and S field at each end? If there is, does it necessarily mean that the N and S fields extending from the core are definitely from the wire, or is it just because the cores domains are lined up at the time? ;]
Is high permeability absolutely necessary to get what we are looking for? Apparently not and hopefully saturation values count for a lot in our case.
Im guna look more into the powder. ;] Nano. would have to handle "very" responsibly.
Mags
QuoteIs high permeability absolutely necessary to get what we are looking for? Apparently not and hopefully saturation values count for a lot in our case.
Did you mean for inner core ?
If so, I don't know what happen here, maybe more current at secondary without reflection ? (since it's very hard for the BEMF to magnetize).
It's curious that Tesla used a bunch of iron wire to make his core and shield, something with a permeability about a few hundreds µ not more...
Attached -- a photo is worth a thousand words... "Captain Jack" shows a coil winder for the Gabriel device -- very impressive!
I think we may be getting the cart before the horse just a bit, in that we still lack solid QUANTITATIVE measurements of Pinput and Poutput (IIRC), but I think he has a good idea for the future!!
Knowing that there exist devices to wind toroids "automatically" is a great relief in some sense... I'm getting a bit tired of winding toroids by hand myself.
I did a screen capture, so you can see the url at the top...
Thanks to a neighbor in town, DanL, for showing me this one. ;)
Mass is definitely involved, less mass on the secondary will have less reactant. We are getting about 288 for a voltage cap with secondary windings. Can only pull 300 watts or so out of the machine at a loss vs. the 14 awg or 16 awg wire which was getting much better reactivity with same length of wire. I would like to add that the 14 and 16 gauge also were setting at about the same voltage levels when started up.
Another 1600 feet will get us a higher level of sustainable voltage. Then we will see where we are again.
So we will add more mass to the secondary fill out the cavity which should get our voltages up fill it out and capture the magnetix.
Mav
Mags' suggestion regarding rods/tubes for the Gabriel build, in order to facilitate winding and experimentation, got me thinking.
I agree strongly with Mags that we need experiments to find out things -- especially -
What affects the Power-out/P-in ratio?
1. the magnetic permeability mu of the core?
2. the magnetic permeability mu of the outer shell?
3. the ratio mu-core/mu-shell?
4. the FREQUENCY of operation?
5. the MASS of the windings on the core? shell?
6. ratio of Turns-core/Turns-shell?
7. volts? amps?
8. How best to measure Pout and Pin?
9. What geometry is best/cheapest? toroid? cylindrical?
9b. How about C-cores?
I would like to recommend consideration of C-cores -- see attached diagram and photo. These are much easier to Wind than toroids... Yet when "put together" to form a complete LOOP, they are much like toroids in trapping the magnetic field.
Further, one can buy pre-wound air cores, and simply "slip" them over the "legs" of the C-core, THEN put the C's together -- voila, a WOUND "toroid" in a few MINUTES!
Easy to make changes also -- take off one pre-wound coil, insert another, or change the core, etc.
A wound-rod is also shown in the photo, for comparison (not as good for trapping the magnetic field!)
The outer shell wound need to conform to the shape of the 2-C-cores, put together, more of a rectangular shape. Should not be too difficult, I suppose.
Gabriel-C (C stands for "C-core")
In the photos, the white card-stock was used to represent how the C-core could be placed into pre-fab coils (two of which are shown, which I bought a while back). The red-wire is to indicate that one could still wind wire onto a "LEG" of the C-core, if preferred.
--StevenEJones
I found a supplier for nanocrystalline, amorphous C-cores (!) -- the diagram is from their website:
http://www.gaotune.com/c-core2.htm
Notice that LARGE C-cores are available -- long dimension up to 249mm, about 10".
I've emailed them, asking for prices on some of these high-mu C-cores.
WE might be thinking ahead to EASE and COST of manufacture of these devices... as well as for experimenting and improving.
I'm thinking of small-scale outfits building devices all over the world -- distributed manufacture, NOT centralized (to get these out to the PEOPLE and make it harder to stop manufacture by the suits or whatever).
C-cores might provide benefits.
I don't think a closed flux path is necessary, I believe that diagram magluvin showed earlier is from distinti's new magnetism. It shows how flux is trapped in the core, as you can see part of it travels outside before being "captured". So I speculate a thick walled steel round/square tube would work only question is what kind of core should be used for the inner core.
@ Broli: Something like a gaped inner core, will give you low µ, low µ will be hard to magnetise and draw a lot of reactive current but I wonder if the secondary will be able to produce more power since it's hard also for BEMF to magnetize...
Actually with this device it's his poor weight/power ratio: 5kg of metal copper for a decade of watts is not too much !!!
Gasoline power density is about 3000 Watts per kilo !!!
Quote from: SchubertReijiMaigo on August 27, 2011, 05:59:10 PM
@ Broli: Something like a gaped inner core, will give you low µ, low µ will be hard to magnetise and draw a lot of reactive current but I wonder if the secondary will be able to produce more power since it's hard also for BEMF to magnetize...
I wouldn't worry about the high reactive current, this can be eliminated by a resonant capacitor, only need to make sure it can handle the voltage.
I finally found a supplier of nano mag powder all!!
http://xuzhounano.en.made-in-china.com/product/aqxQtgPbaScF/China-Nano-Magnetic-Cobalt-Powder-27NP-HW-.html
if we want to make our own cores this maybe the correct powder, (I believe it is worth a try)
This is the wire and winding specs. On this site is also a great terminology section.
http://www.mhw-intl.com/assets/CSC/CSC%20Wire%20and%20Winding%20Data%202011.pdf
Just a couple of thoughts that I woke up to. The Rodin coil is thought to be following the natural path of flow and is > 60 % more efficient. It might be found we should connect the ends of it (maybe with a capacitor) so it is complete and learn to energize it at different point(s) (perhaps at the different number points used to create it’s geometry ). Maybe we can create a 90 degree phase shift just using a Rodin coil and have the Gabriel effect duplicated by this one coil. If we make the primary out of a Rodin can't the secondary capture all of it since the Rodin's wire can be non ferrous?
And if a Rodin coil is so efficient at making a magnetic field, maybe it is also good at capturing a magnetic field. If so it could be that it is useful at capturing the Gabriel devices magnetic field or could be useful in this project somehow elsewhere? Good night friends.
Think less rodin coil, Think more Vortex windings
kk on the vortex winding.
We need to get a discount from Magnetec. We are a group membership.
We are buying many cores, we deserve some discount for doing concerted business with them. I will ask, I have done lots of R&D work and have managed this before. I want other energy forums to join us in this general grouping so we may have better recognition of our purchasing power and then we warrant group discounts due to quantity buying. If you have bought a core call back and let them know WHICH energy forum you are with. I will call them tomorrow at the NJ office.
Hello I have tried building this device, but i am having a couple problems.
Nanocrystalline Core perm u= 20000
250 turns secondary 18AWG
3" Donut mild steel 2mm thick
150turns primary 18AWG
I am using a audio amplifier to vary the freq.
The results i get are, at 19hz to increase current
IN 25V @ 19hZ
5.5A
137W
OUT 10V
0A no load
0.2A load
2W
I have attached photos of the build and scope photos.
In the photos red (input) yellow (output).
The two donut halves are insulated from each other on the centre , but the outer are connected.
What am i doing wrong?
Thanks
Matt
1) For mine the best result was when I don't saturate the inner core...
2) In your scope your current is highly distorted so PF is not equal to one even if your current/voltageare in phase. Harmonics are reactive in nature.
3) Try different load: too much load = very low output, too light = very low output also...
4) If not try to wind more turns at secondary for having higher EMF...
5) Good luck.
SRM.
Quote from: matthewklinko on August 29, 2011, 02:47:03 AM
Hello I have tried building this device, but i am having a couple problems.
Nanocrystalline Core perm u= 20000
250 turns secondary 18AWG
3" Donut mild steel 2mm thick
150turns primary 18AWG
I am using a audio amplifier to vary the freq.
The results i get are, at 19hz to increase current
IN 25V @ 19hZ
5.5A
137W
OUT 10V
0A no load
0.2A load
2W
I have attached photos of the build and scope photos.
In the photos red (input) yellow (output).
The two donut halves are insulated from each other on the centre , but the outer are connected.
What am i doing wrong?
Thanks
Matt
A very impressive looking device, Matt -- thanks for your careful work.
1. When you say, Vin = 25 V and Vout = 10V, is this the RMS voltage?
This result is surprising to me since you have 250 turns on the secondary and 150 turns on the primary -- so that one might expect Vout/Vin >1, when you find Vout/Vin<1.
2.
Do you have the "multiply" function on your scope? If so, recommend that you take V(t)*I(t) and show that waveform, the instantaneous Power waveform. This would be helpful and may provide insights (my scope has this function). V(t) is the voltage drop -- the input or output voltage-- and I(t) is found from the voltage drop across a 1-ohm resistor, or an X-ohm resistor (then the Power is divided by X, the resistance in ohms.)
3. As I mentioned in an earlier post, I think we need to vary parameters,
do experiments in an effort to first UNDERSTAND how variations affect the Pout/Pin ratio (and Vout/Vin).
4. I agree with SRM that you might vary the load and take measurements -- but I also suggest that you vary the FREQUENCY. From 19 Hz (which is low) to say a few hundred Hz, and record results.
Again, the first step for me would be to plot the Power waveform then evaluate it -- can you do that?
The graphs show voltage across the coil in the primary and the secondary
The currents weren't graphed , i used a multimeter
The voltages are peak to peak voltages .
At higher frequencies the current reduces as you increase frequency. The voltage at the output is not distorted at higher frequencies,
I have gone from 19hz to 20khz .
Also I switched the input to the secondary , and got a better transfer to the primary then in the normal case. The voltage was much higher
Mavendex said there should be no transfer to the primary if done this way
I may have to put a resister is series with the input to measure current and also the output .
Any ideas would be appreciated thanks
Matt
To make no transfer to the outershell you must make it so current can't flow thru the secondary.
Matt, are you using the (loading) setup schematic diagram we have posted? and are your metal core halves isolated from ALL wire?, and insulated also from each other?
Quote from: Mavendex on August 29, 2011, 09:47:30 AM
To make no transfer to the outershell you must make it so current can't flow thru the secondary.
So I must increase number of turns in secondary or driving frequency
I will experiment with this
Thanks
Quote from: Hope on August 29, 2011, 10:32:43 AM
Matt, are you using the (loading) setup schematic diagram we have posted? and are your metal core halves isolated from ALL wire?, and insulated also from each other?
Hope what is the loading schematic?
Mine is amplifier to primary and a 5w 12v light globe to secondary
Also the 2 halves of the mild steel shell aren't fully isolated .
I put electrical tape on the inner edge and isolated at that point so not to create a single electrical loop . Are they meant to be fully isolated, in some of mavendexs pics it didn't look like he did, maybe he can clarify that
Thanks
Quote from: matthewklinko on August 29, 2011, 10:57:42 AM
Hope what is the loading schematic?
Mine is amplifier to primary and a 5w 12v light globe to secondary
Also the 2 halves of the mild steel shell aren't fully isolated .
I put electrical tape on the inner edge and isolated at that point so not to create a single electrical loop . Are they meant to be fully isolated, in some of mavendexs pics it didn't look like he did, maybe he can clarify that
Thanks
Ya they are isolated. when I try a new configuration from time to time Ill connect them but its always the wrong thing to do hehe.
On page 1 of this thread, we see that a "kill-o-watt" meter was used.
My question: is such a device reliable for determining power if the input (or output) voltage is other than 110 or 230 V, or if the frequency is other than 60 or 50 Hz? Perhaps there is a version of this device that can reliably give the power reading over a broad range of voltages, and frequencies?
Quote from: JouleSeeker on August 30, 2011, 12:31:15 AM
On page 1 of this thread, we see that a "kill-o-watt" meter was used.
My question: is such a device reliable for determining power if the input (or output) voltage is other than 110 or 230 V, or if the frequency is other than 60 or 50 Hz? Perhaps there is a version of this device that can reliably give the power reading over a broad range of voltages, and frequencies?
So far Ive smoked a couple of them, it won't take over 180 volts, and it won't take over 20 amps and starts beeping at you once you hit the threshold of 15 amps input/output. I use a Fluke Amp clamp/volt meter if expect to take voltages over 180 and then use a low load to determine amps like a 2.5 amp halogen will burn brightly at 120 v and 2.5 amps if your over on volts then you know your amp pool is full and then take a voltage reading, I wouldn't take those guys over 190 tho they burn out :)
Seems pretty reliable my variac has a separate analog meter attached and the volts reading on the killowatt match the analog meter, if your using 15 amps you will know it cause of the sound it creates, and she keeps up pretty good.
I got two new configurations going on at the moment Simultaneous to speed things along, 1 configuration is 750 feet of 9 gauge wire on the secondary which is a M-117 core, and haven't yet determined my input gauge yet that will be tonight's test, I'm expecting to support 120 volts and plenty of amps with that and should take us over, after the mass experiment.
The second configuration is a hand cut shell made from Transformer Lamenant, 3.4 ohms of 16 gauge around a M-417 core, I tested it already with a small amount of 14 gauge primary, and did very well with a voltage test out. 15 volts and 15 amps in and 47 volts out, did not test a load yet... l usually wait till I can support a 120 volt load before I do that.
Key note here with 15 amps being input the normal heating I would expect from the bigger shell on the wires was not present, I suspect mabye that Magnetostriction is causing lots of losses in the big shell and that's why we are having a issue going over on it on a major scale.
Tonight's tests should confirm output greater than the 14 gauge test I did a couple of weeks ago to where we could only draw out 7 amps. Note (Ive noticed a distinctive correlation between the maximum amps for transmission and wire gauge are inline with my tests so far, and should be able to nip this all in the bud.)
Mav.
Well, its gotten down to sort of rolling sticky cigs. The jb weld is not thin. I want the least amount of jb and the max amount of iron wire pieces.. Still working on it.
Also changed to an enamel paint, as the lacquer came off easily when working with them. I dont want any electrical contact at all between the wires.
Fun fun fun
Im really leaning toward getting some nano powders. ;]
Mags
Quote from: Magluvin on August 30, 2011, 01:07:16 PM
Im really leaning toward getting some nano powders. ;]
Mags
Mmmmmm Nanopowders :)
Here is the link for nano powder from the page 48
http://xuzhounano.en.made-in-china.com/product/aqxQtgPbaScF/China-Nano-Magnetic-Cobalt-Powder-27NP-HW-.html
Hope: Will this company in China sell small quantities to individuals?
@Mav:
QuoteSo far Ive smoked a couple of them, it won't take over 180 volts, and it won't take over 20 amps and starts beeping at you once you hit the threshold of 15 amps input/output. I use a Fluke Amp clamp/volt meter if expect to take voltages over 180 and then use a low load to determine amps like a 2.5 amp halogen will burn brightly at 120 v and 2.5 amps if your over on volts then you know your amp pool is full and then take a voltage reading, I wouldn't take those guys over 190 tho they burn out :)
Seems pretty reliable my variac has a separate analog meter attached and the volts reading on the killowatt match the analog meter, if your using 15 amps you will know it cause of the sound it creates, and she keeps up pretty good.
I got two new configurations going on at the moment Simultaneous to speed things along, 1 configuration is 750 feet of 9 gauge wire on the secondary which is a M-117 core, and haven't yet determined my input gauge yet that will be tonight's test, I'm expecting to support 120 volts and plenty of amps with that and should take us over, after the mass experiment.
Thanks for this input. I take it that the kill-o-watts will work at <120 V input, please correct me if I misunderstood ...
And that 15or 20 amps is the maximum.
Best wishes on your tests. I'm not there yet, but hoping to learn also how best to amplify the power in.... Any clues from your experiments and tests would be appreciated!
Quote from: Hope on August 30, 2011, 05:08:53 PM
Here is the link for nano powder from the page 48
http://xuzhounano.en.made-in-china.com/product/aqxQtgPbaScF/China-Nano-Magnetic-Cobalt-Powder-27NP-HW-.html
Hey Hope
Is this the best stuff? I wonder how Neodymium material would work as a core. not magnetized of course . Or is Mavs material find better? If I go this route, I want zee bezt. ;]
Max flux density.
Im still going for 1/2 in dia inner core at 2 in, long.
Im cutting enough wires to fill the void and as the jb takes up some space, Ill have a few left out Im sure. Pretty much a rubber gloves job until I figure a solid method or go nano, or other particle/powder mix.
I would think that a powder with resin, to get a dense powder mix, the result before hardening should be a consistency of clay? This interests me. Nano Goo Cores.
Maybe if thin shell containers could be used and we can fill the shell container with the powder, which could be made into a nano fluid with oil, then the material can be reused for something else if the subsequent cores are not desirable any longer. This would be good if the materials are expensive. Especially during development.
Ya know, I find some toroid cores that if you scrape the coating off, they are just iron, or what ever composition, but they measure continuity all over. Wouldnt that be a huge loss? Maybe they are for chokes, but losses are losses. A choke is just suppose to impede, not consume the unwanted. I always scrape them to test for this with unknown cores.
Ok, time to put on the rubber gloves. ;] After cutting many many wires. and paint. ugh. ;]
Mags
Quote from: Magluvin on August 30, 2011, 08:07:25 PMI find some toroid cores that if you sc the coating off, they are just iron, or what ever composition
Nanoperm is very thin strips of iron which after being molten and then formed is cooled superfast giving it a different crystalline structure, and thus improved magnetic properties.
Be careful with powders, as is they probably don't have a high permeability unless you compress them under high pressure into shape.
QuoteThanks for this input. I take it that the kill-o-watts will work at <120 V input, please correct me if I misunderstood ...
And that 15or 20 amps is the maximum.
Beware with this, this kind of cheap meter don't measure deformed current (saturated trafos) switched power power supply) it's designed to work at or nearly 120 volts and 50 or 60 Hertz...
It's not a true wattmeter, Beware of false value !!!
Anyone know where you can get some foil, in particular Permalloy Foil ?... as per the example on this site:
http://www.gitc21.net/co/e-song/GC01914596/CA01878439/Permalloy_Foil.html
They make it, but I don't know of anywhere that sells it ?
I want to try this out instead of using a donut so as to get very close to the secondary. Might need to roll it around several times to get better thickness tho.
For testing I propose ferrite core in cup shape as a shield. It is small so you don't pay too much, only need to fit nano core into it. and windings like 0.5mm copper enameled
Quote from: SchubertReijiMaigo on August 31, 2011, 04:45:37 AM
Beware with this, this kind of cheap meter don't measure deformed current (saturated trafos) switched power power supply) it's designed to work at or nearly 120 volts and 50 or 60 Hertz...
It's not a true wattmeter, Beware of false value !!!
your right its not the best meter but it works
and yes the meter will work with less than 120 volts, it doesn't actually start working untill you input 47 volts after that shes pretty good.
Hey Mav
The nano powder you suggested, is it the best that you know of?
Was it 50 g? It would be just below a couple ounces each.
Hey Broli
Some type of epoxy would have to be used to hold it together(the powder). I dont think compressing would do any good once its a fluid(putty) and least if any bubbles. I think high ppm of the power per solidifier would be the best for our needs.
Im looking at some 2 part that is high heat( coils will heat up). Has to be baked from what I read. And those parameters of baking will probably change with the powder material being a majority of the mix. Putty.
But that stuff will come later if heat issues show up. Im looking for a thin resin mix rather than thick to ensure a mix that is workable to avoid bubbles.
Lol if we git any extree out, we could use some for water cooling for continuous use if necessary. ;]
Mav, your core, have you tried putting a magnet to it to feel the attraction, as compared to other things like iron, etc.?
Mags
Quote from: Magluvin on August 31, 2011, 12:43:10 PM
Hey Mav
The nano powder you suggested, is it the best that you know of?
Was it 50 g? It would be just below a couple ounces each.
Hey Broli
Some type of epoxy would have to be used to hold it together(the powder). I dont think compressing would do any good once its a fluid(putty) and least if any bubbles. I think high ppm of the power per solidifier would be the best for our needs.
Im looking at some 2 part that is high heat( coils will heat up). Has to be baked from what I read. And those parameters of baking will probably change with the powder material being a majority of the mix. Putty.
But that stuff will come later if heat issues show up. Im looking for a thin resin mix rather than thick to ensure a mix that is workable to avoid bubbles.
Lol if we git any extree out, we could use some for water cooling for continuous use if necessary. ;]
Mav, your core, have you tried putting a magnet to it to feel the attraction, as compared to other things like iron, etc.?
Mags
@ Mags - Yes thats the best powder I know of they sell in bundles of 100 grams a pop and that is 500 dollars if im not mistaken, the idea on this with your epoxy mix would to first make the ferrofluid, then mix it with the epoxy. the nanopowder will make around 10 gallons of weak ferrofluid or 1 gallon of some very awesome ferrofluid, The idea of making the fluid first would be to take advantage of the sodium polyacrulate (surfactant) cause otherwise if we mix it directly with the epoxy we wouldn't get a nice spread of particles, Im afraid it would clump up and we would have pockets of powder with jb weld and to the other extreme of no powder and jbweld in other areas.
Cooling - and yes that was my original intention for the cooling cause the magnetism would pump it for us after we add plumbing, not only that but would add more magnetic domains, & last but not least maybe give us more charge cause of the movement of the fluid. (a charged magnetic field moving along a circuit should induce more voltage with added benifits. (but thats just a hypothesis I have yet to prove.) or we or whatever is clever.
Mav
Goldmine electonics has that perma foil
www.goldmine-elec.com/
Update on CLETUS HOWELL - Just after he floated a rock and was barred from the forum he was found dead and his files all erased. RIP Prince of Meshack (MyHouse). He has physical shapes doing what we all still can't do. His brain infection made it hard for him to communicate with us all.
Hey Mav
Ahh 50g each. ;] Like 3 oz. Seems like some powerful stuff if it can make 1 gal of strong fluid. Water mix? Normal ferro fluid is oil.
From my experience, say if you mix glass micro bubbles(thickener) to resin, it is highly recommended that you mix the 2 parts epoxy first, then add the bubbles or powder. Probably table top resin, or surf board resin. With a lot of material added to the resin, the cure time will probably go up because the material will absorb the heat from curing, so it will take longer.
This regular jb takes a while to even stiffen up. The quick is too fast.
I ran a large brick magnet in the bead blaster at work and got some nice iron powder to add to the mix im rollin over here. Im finishing up painting the wires tonight using a flexible primer{SEM can). Ive got at least a couple of grams of iron dust.
Im not feelin real confident on this wire concoction, thinking there is something better out there. ;] But I shall STICKy to it as im interested.
Mav, do you have a link to the stuff so I can get a gander at what they have to say about it? Thanks Im pretty interested. Once im sure, we will have to figure how to do the deed. ;]
Magscores
Quote from: Magluvin on August 31, 2011, 06:24:33 PM
Hey Mav
Ahh 50g each. ;] Like 3 oz. Seems like some powerful stuff if it can make 1 gal of strong fluid. Water mix? Normal ferro fluid is oil.
From my experience, say if you mix glass micro bubbles(thickener) to resin, it is highly recommended that you mix the 2 parts epoxy first, then add the bubbles or powder. Probably table top resin, or surf board resin. With a lot of material added to the resin, the cure time will probably go up because the material will absorb the heat from curing, so it will take longer.
This regular jb takes a while to even stiffen up. The quick is too fast.
I ran a large brick magnet in the bead blaster at work and got some nice iron powder to add to the mix im rollin over here. Im finishing up painting the wires tonight using a flexible primer{SEM can). Ive got at least a couple of grams of iron dust.
Im not feelin real confident on this wire concoction, thinking there is something better out there. ;] But I shall STICKy to it as im interested.
Mav, do you have a link to the stuff so I can get a gander at what they have to say about it? Thanks Im pretty interested. Once im sure, we will have to figure how to do the deed. ;]
Magscores
Mags
Good to know about the chemistry, I wish we could buy wire that has a Permalloy coating but insulated from the wire. That would be rather interesting. good luck with your concoction, I wouldn't expect nothing to happen :D
I may be off on the gallons part but the nanopowder is <10nm particles so ya its the real deal, noncombustable with the water based stuff.
almost forgot, http://www.vivenano.com
Mav
Hey mav
Ya, I forgot you posted the pdf earlier, couple pages ago. ;]
Says superparamagnetic It seems a bit confusing, I hope it can be had just powder, no water. Says it has a shelf life and needs refrigerated. :o Sooo is it the water that causes the shelf life, or if powder/epoxy would preserve it? ;]
I will send an e to them and ask a few questions.
And I uploaded the hazard sheet here
Mags
Nano magnetite is NOT the same mix as what you can get from the other link I researched for you all.
http://www.ruf.rice.edu/~natelson/theses/fursina_thesis.pdf this link is ONLY to show you figure 1.4 it has a structure Water Russell drew once as matters creation.
Magnetite is like the stuff kids magic magnetic rocks are made of (bet you can't break one of these rocks).
This one IS nearly the same combo as the magnetec stuff.
http://xuzhounano.en.made-in-china.com/product/aqxQtgPbaScF/China-Nano-Magnetic-Cobalt-Powder-27NP-HW-.html
Quote from: Magluvin on August 31, 2011, 09:56:54 PM
Hey mav
Ya, I forgot you posted the pdf earlier, couple pages ago. ;]
Says superparamagnetic It seems a bit confusing, I hope it can be had just powder, no water. Says it has a shelf life and needs refrigerated. :o Sooo is it the water that causes the shelf life, or if powder/epoxy would preserve it? ;]
I will send an e to them and ask a few questions.
And I uploaded the hazard sheet here
Mags
Hey Mags,
Ya you can buy it just powder Im guessing it has to be refrigerated because otherwise things will accumulate together over time.
I wanted to also say I figured out turns ratios on this guy, for every 1 turn you will get .11 volts, no matter how many turns you have on your primary, only thing more turns on the primary will do is drop the power factor and allow a person with a variac to input more voltage with a desired amperage.
This is with the shells I had made and a couple of different nanocores with varying permeability.
So 1090 turns on the secondary with 12 guage wire should give us some healthy amperage and 120 volts
and 2180 turns on the secondary with 14 guage will do 250 volts
after you pass the threshold of 250 volts it seems to give you diminishing returns on the innercore as far as voltages and your amps wane.
but even with 6000 we were getting not a terrible return. So I have 12 gauge coming so we can get that healthy amperage and I have a 16 ready to test tomorrow afternoon. at the 2180 mark.
Kick the Tires and light the fires!
If anyone needs a great deal on a digital storage 4 channel pocket scope.
DSO203
You can get a poor deal all over ebay or instead go to Seeed electronics and get a great deal INCLUDING FOUR probes both your analog and digital ones WITH the X1 and X10 options. Its OS is open source and has ability to be updated each time a nice revision comes out. If you look at their catalog it has a $2.10 Aluminum stand and will make your purchase over $200.00 WHICH qualifies you for a 10% discount with a code available from the net. I have it downstairs and will post if anyone wants it.
Nano Perm Sheets link http://www.goldmine-elec-products.com/prodinfo.asp?number=G16600A
Quote from: Hope on August 31, 2011, 11:38:48 PM
Nano Perm Sheets link http://www.goldmine-elec-products.com/prodinfo.asp?number=G16600A
Thanks for this, Hope. I just got a couple of these sheets, which may serve well for
a cylindrical version of the Gabriel device... I'd like to try it. I also purchased wire from the source you mentioned earlier -- thanks for these pointers!
At the same time, I'm also looking into
Don Smith's tapped-Tesla coil design... has anyone else looked at this approach?
Hey Mav
Thats good info on the volts per turn. Seems to make me reconsider the hows of normal transformer ratios.
I wonder if the shell were thinner, if the sec voltage might increase per turn. Have you had experience with thinner shells, or are these voltages the same in any config?
Was thinking on the higher turns to get the voltage up and keep the amps in range. Maybe with more turns, even though the amps out total are kept at bay, the more turns could still be causing more field in the core because each turn at the desired amperage will induce flux..
More turns more flux. No? 10 turns at 10 amps, then 100 turns at 10 amps. So maybe that is what you are experiencing with diminishing returns. I might say that once you get to that point, a larger(or better core is needed) to avoid high saturation.
Hey Hope
I have been planing on getting that scope for some time now. And your source, with 4 probes sounds like a real deal.
Really looks like a great item, better than the previous version. ;]
My goo core has a lot of wires. I made enough to fit a 1/2 in tube(wires painted). Tonight Ill count them and roll them and should be cured by tomorrow.
What I have figured is to coat the inside of a piece of shrink tube, and stuff the wire goo into the shrink and then shrink it to squeeze out some excess. Once cured, cut and peal the shrink and shave the ends level if need be. Hopefully in the end, we will be able to see each wire that are around the surface once pealed.
Powders are looking better all the time. ;]
Mags
Quote from: Magluvin on September 01, 2011, 01:10:45 PMI might say that once you get to that point, a larger(or better core is needed) to avoid high saturation.
I am going to experiment by winding wire around two nanoperms together, coz I think like you this may be a problem area, and I'm expecting the results could be quite an exciting improvement.
@ Hope. Thanks for the info you found for me on the nanoperm sheets/foil. Even better being Ultra perm 80. Just what i was looking for ;D
@Mav. Many thanks to you also for all your info provided to the forum and also especially for getting us all started on this exciting adventure. :'(
Has anyone found a cheaper source for these nano cryst. 10nm cores? AND the credit for the nano ultra sheets is kinda Jouleseekers leading. He said he had a Goldmine core to share so I researched there catalog and found the sheets there. They must be going fast, because a week ago they offered 100 sheets for $500. carton lot. Singles only now, so if you want some anyone I would grab them asap.
Your welcome all.
I still have not ordered my cores, was waiting to see if anyone needed to order with my order to save big bucks. I will be getting a couple of M-616's or equivalents soon. We can order together and get drop shipment to our own addresses. I been busy with a service project and will be able to work on this evening and Saturdays a bit. Winter is coming and have lots to get ready.
@ Mags, Yes the thinner shells seem to boost voltages quicker but thats as far as I have gotten on that, my turns shorted out do to being overworked so had to order new wire. I probably put 3 of these together a week to figure out certain variables, and where the best output can be found.
So far I can pull out 600 watts out of the 2000 turn 16 gauge innercore which is pretty close to the 6000 turn 14 gauge innercore.
and the 21 gauge I could only pull 300 watts as max output.
not trying any tricks or anything just straight 120 volts 5 amps or a 600 watt load.
Differences:
21 gauge core, helical wound, 6000 turns, and a 250 turn 9 Gauge Primary
Max output - 300 watts - 15% efficiency
14 gauge core, helical wound, 6000 turns, and a 378 turn 9 Gauge Primary
Max output - 600 watts - 76% efficiency
16 gauge core, geometrically wound, 2000 turns, and 400 turn 14 Gauge Primary
Max output - 600 watts - 76% efficiency
(Note)If it was a 9 gauge primary I would get about the same watts out with much less input and would drive up my efficiency.
Next item up for bid, 2000 turn 12 gauge, geometrically wound with a 400 turn 9 gauge primary, I expect to get much more than 600 watts out of this guy for just about the same price.
Wire pending arrival t-minus 6 days and counting on the 12 gauge.
@Cheap, whats with the cry face? and your welcome?
Thank you Mavendex, your notes are useful.
Just read about nano wire proof on duality of light and it makes a question about decaying matter that may mean all matter has duality. Which is like north and south poles. This would explain how John (the unique) Hutchinson made metal bars twist and bend apart and dust of nano size. He was causing the atoms to reverse charges and repel against each other atom. So like Ed Leedskalin proposed everything IS magnets. Then what happens if we apply this to current?? Can we make these charges repel the atoms in the current chain and then when we stop the effect and they start current again. If this current carrier is causing induction then the pole disassociation will also cause a type of current flow in the induction. Switch this on and off and we have current without going to ground. Hope you can follow this logic it means it is a way of releasing atomic bonds using only pole flipping. The conductor could even be inside a glass tube vacuum and the pickup coils outside the tube. Magnetic fields in motion and frequency seems to be a key element. I only am writing this to lend a thought to what maybe happening with the Gabriel device influenced by the phase shift. This would or could cause a momentary realignment of poles in the electrical charges and this flux COULD add up to the additional energies gained.??
Has anyone tried primary windings using same method as Tesla used in his patent 381970, System of electrical distribution ? Divide primary into four quadrants and put 'positive wave' through two opposing quadrants and 'negative wave' through other two. This way Tesla added rotation in the magnetic field.
You would need to use two diodes to separate current in two parts.
You can find the patent from here (search for 381970): http://www.free-energy-info.co.uk/Chapter5.pdf
If someone is not familiar with this site then it is worth checking out, ABC of free energy stuff. You should read also Chapter3.pdf, about solid state systems.
[HS ON] @ Jack:
You read in my mind or what !? Since it's seem that Tesla look alike device seem to produce FE (Gabriel device is a good example) I have read all Tesla patent in solid state transformer generator,etc... I have studied this generator 382.282 with his four coils... It look like a TPU of Stevan Mark... I have made simulation with coils plugged like the patent (did you notice they are connected in a weird way ?) This device did not produce a rotating magnetic field like a motor but EM pulse when the two phase are in opposition polarity...
I guess this converter produce energy not by transformer action (output is not sinusoidal but rather pulse like I said above... Maybe it can be FE also...
Remember that Tesla does not speak to FE in his patent always hide it !!!
I have a big CRGO core but this device need a two phase at 90° driver, I don't know where can find this...
[HS OFF]
@ Mav: congratulations, for this experiment !!!
1) It seems that increasing turns, increase power.
2) Reducing thickness shell also... Mine is about 1.5 mm, I wonder with 0.1 mm what the result it would be, hmm... !
3) Good to know this for later version.
4) I wait always about my 2kg 16 AWG wire, so I can't replicate at this time...
SRM.
Quote from: Jack Noskills on September 02, 2011, 02:42:17 AM
Has anyone tried primary windings using same method as Tesla used in his patent 381970, System of electrical distribution ? Divide primary into four quadrants and put 'positive wave' through two opposing quadrants and 'negative wave' through other two. This way Tesla added rotation in the magnetic field.
You would need to use two diodes to separate current in two parts.
You can find the patent from here (search for 381970): http://www.free-energy-info.co.uk/Chapter5.pdf
If someone is not familiar with this site then it is worth checking out, ABC of free energy stuff. You should read also Chapter3.pdf, about solid state systems.
I have not tried this but a geometrically wound primary will move the field around as well, I may try this since I have some days of down time.
although speaking from personal experience, trying to geometrically wind a primary with 9 gauge is rather difficult, not impossible but difficult.
Do you have diodes you can use ? The hot line should be divided in two parts if I understood the patent correctly. Basicly you split hotline in two, upper part has diode opposing then coil after it, lower part has coil and after it diode in passing direction. Then these two are combined again. This way current from left goes via lower path and current from right goes via upper part.
Also the windings should be such that they form S-N S-N S-N S-N around toroid. And if there is no effect do it like I do when I have no clue (which is usually the case), reverse the order of the wires lol.
I don't have any diodes but radioshack I would hope has some otherwise there is Mouser :)
If I don't see a change with the Geometry ill give that Tesla deal a go, but from experience going from helical to a geometric shape tends to change up the phase angle, and increase power out. Its just really difficult to do with the shell vs. the nanoperm core.
Tons of stuff out there that is untouched or overlooked the universe is in fact a playground for the curious.
Mav
Yea! "DIFFICULT"...sheesh, I just got through winding 70 ft of 14 gauge onto a 3 1/2 inch nanoperm for my Bismuth shell. Note: For all of you trying the bismuth route make sure you let the molten bismuth cool just ABOVE solidification point --otherwise you'll end up with no Bismuth sticking to the clay barrier! (very frusterating) ;) my last gabbys' secondary windings were "fried" because I didnt cover them with a clay barrier. oops. Live and learn.
@ Mavendex: Question.. How far should the outer shell be seperated from eachother? I have a gabby that is close to ~ 4" wide I dunno if that helps, but I would really appreciate feedback, thanks Mavendex
I'm still working on this big shell I had made, tried a few other things like cutting up Transformer Lamination's to create a shell, Lots of sharp edges but lays right on top of the windings and is much closer to the nanocore. but again my primary turns were so overworked I had shorts and could not get to a point of drawing any power.
Before they shorted I can tell you that the voltage gain was far superior to the shell I have made, but again I could not draw power off so I wouldn't know if they were supported or not, my guess is a good majority of the volts would have been supported due to being right next to the primary shell which is the case for the steel shell I had made.
The closer those windings are to the shell the better support your gonna get.
Mav
Hey Mav
How high was the voltage with the thin laminate shell?
Below is a pic of how the pdf attached (again for those that have not read) explains flux propagation from the primary is able to cut the secondary windings.
Today I was thinking, what happens in this device being the shell is in the way of the flux getting to the other side.
Does it just flow around the inner doughnut(of the shell) without penetrating the shell?
This may be our problem area. If the flux wants to cut across as shown, possibly more material can be applied to the inner circle of the shell, leaving the sides and outer shell thin.. Mav, since you are the champion winder ;] and had problems with this thin shell, maybe when you rewind it, you could try thickening the inner dia of the shell with more strips. ;] Its worth a try..
I would think to thicken it a bit wide from middle level, where the shells normally meet all the way around.
This way the primary field still has a way in around the thin areas.
The secondaries field will more likely want to cross over toward the opposite side of the inner core, like in the pic. If it can, it will cross the primary causing the primary input to rise. ;]
With these thoughts, Im not sure yet how it relates to my cylinder style model. Thats what Im going to think about the rest of the afternoon at work.
Mags
One more ting. Yes ting. ;]
I really really really want and need to see a scope shot of in and out. The sec should be interesting to see when the primary penetrates the shell. This must be why there is a phase difference. The sec current doesnt begin till the primary field is at the point of just penetrating the shell. so the primary leads by quite a bit possibly. ;]
And does this delayed penetration cause a pulsed type wave to the sec? Off during low level(not penetrating) and On above threshold(penetrating). Scope shots.
Gotta see a scope shot. May have to buy a core. What is the best? Are you using the best? ;]
Mags
Jouleseeker: please, could you share the supplier of those cheaper ultra cores you mentioned. I am heavy on researching correlations and this takes me all over the net. But still I have not found a USA source to ultra sat. cores with a value pricing. I will study the formulation they use and check the data specs with respect to Magnetecs offerings and give the forum the straight scoop on it. We all seem anxious to get started with a build. I still think a rod inner core wrapped with 4 sections of pipe (split 4 ways) will allow us to phase each pipe section, squeezing the electrical/magnetics to respond differently than any device presently on the market. These nano ultra SHEETS could be used to line or cover the pipe in different ways or just wrap the secondary in it as the core covering then wrap (wind) the primary over the sheet. (This may prove to us that the steel doughnut is not needed). that way we could add all the windings we want to the secondary and then just wrap it with sheets split to sections or spirals to cause the phase shifts.
As far a matching the resonance automatically here are to interesting links displaying Bedini like simple circuit doing that. I have these schematics if any want to build like units.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4l1PfmTheFM&feature=autoplay&list=ULHx7aWaPbBo4&lf=mfu_in_order&playnext=1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hx7aWaPbBo4&feature=bf_prev&list=UL4l1PfmTheFM&lf=mfu_in_order
Give me some feed back please if this was useful to anyone.
Can we make these torrid blanks ourselves (within the forum) using this technique?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vkdr3JKovZQ&feature=related
Granted it is copper, but light gauge metal should be workable too.. or not?
Quote from: Hope on September 02, 2011, 02:11:13 PM
Jouleseeker: please, could you share the supplier of those cheaper ultra cores you mentioned. I am heavy on researching correlations and this takes me all over the net. But still I have not found a USA source to ultra sat. cores with a value pricing. I will study the formulation they use and check the data specs with respect to Magnetecs offerings and give the forum the straight scoop on it. We all seem anxious to get started with a build. I still think a rod inner core wrapped with 4 sections of pipe (split 4 ways) will allow us to phase each pipe section, squeezing the electrical/magnetics to respond differently than any device presently on the market. These nano ultra SHEETS could be used to line or cover the pipe in different ways or just wrap the secondary in it as the core covering then wrap (wind) the primary over the sheet. (This may prove to us that the steel doughnut is not needed). that way we could add all the windings we want to the secondary and then just wrap it with sheets split to sections or spirals to cause the phase shifts.
Hope: http://www.cwsbytemark.com/index.php?main_page=index&cPath=247
I ordered the CN100-80-20G, 100 mm OD, 80mm ID -- but they were out of stock, 5 week delay.
Hope:
QuoteThese nano ultra [high-perm] SHEETS could be used to line or cover the pipe in different ways or just wrap the secondary in it as the core covering then wrap (wind) the primary over the sheet.
Right... I like the idea of cylindrical geometry also, and the use of the high perm sheets.
About the M-616 from Magnetec, pls let us know the price, would you? I would really like to buy one of these, if the price is decent (<$250 about).
Geometry wound on the primary increased efficiency by 30% :) with 100 less turns.
t-minus 3 days till we get the 12 gauge, secondary 5 days till we get the 10 gauge primary.
Mav
I will just post this modded Bedini from the YouTube due to numerous requests (lots of you want it so here it is). I never have seen so much HHO made from 52 volts at 800Hz and only micro amps. This guy is on to something with this auto resonant matching circuit.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4l1PfmTheFM&feature=autoplay&list=ULHx7aWaPbBo4&lf=mfu_in_order&playnext=1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hx7aWaPbBo4&feature=bf_prev&list=UL4l1PfmTheFM&lf=mfu_in_order
BE SURE TO USE A TRANSISTOR FAST ENOUGH FOR YOUR LOAD Matching. and don't operate without a load.
When high pressure systems and low pressure systems meet lots of energy is released. Can this be simulated with our Gabriel device, perhaps phasing is doing just this very thing.
What do you all think?
How can we make this happen with intent? Is this what happens in a Bifilar winding?? Can we drive a bifilar winding with two mixed signals like nature does??
Signed "Sleepless near Seattle"
ps THIS new topic may interest you all.
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=11370.msg299480#msg299480
something like ?
courtesy of google images
Mavendex
Can you turn your device upside down and test if there is still gain ?
YES Yes yes INCLUDING the wideness of the swirl condensing into a small area. Like water hydro mining does. XD photo Mavendex. Nature shows us what works if we pay attention.
Mavendex Question.. How far should the outer shell be seperated from eachother? I have a gabby that is close to ~ 4" wide I dunno if that helps, but I would really appreciate feedback, thanks Mavendex
Quote from: AmericanMan31 on September 05, 2011, 08:11:30 PM
Mavendex Question.. How far should the outer shell be seperated from eachother? I have a gabby that is close to ~ 4" wide I dunno if that helps, but I would really appreciate feedback, thanks Mavendex
Unfortunately, I do not know the answer to the question its like the only variable I can't mess with, without changing the shell I'm currently working with, but when I am able to make several different sizes, and thickness to find the optimum value, ill let you know.
One comment about this quadrant phasing using diodes. When one quadrant conducts, it will induce voltage also in the idle quadrant that is now blocked with diode. But it does not stay there, so I was thinking maybe an AC capacitor in parallel with coil to capture it and when voltage drops as sine wave starts to go down this stored energy would come back as blocking diode would begin to conduct. Capacitor should be big enough to store energy but I quess any size would do for testing purposes. Two caps would be needed, one for each coil.
From secondary point of view it would first see flux coming with certain intensity and when diode begins to conduct flux intensity would increase. So now field would be rotating and increasing in density with time. Maybe worth a test drive ?
Edit: direction of quadrant windings could also play a role here and should be taken into account. If two quadrants begin to conduct at the same time their fluxes should be in the same direction in order for secondary to see anything. And while cap is being loaded this would mean there is current going in idle quadrant until cap is filled ? How will secondary react to flux from this ? hmm, maybe there is opposing flux in some time instant no matter how quadrant is wound.
I don't think it matters as long as its over 100% right? Geometric shapes like the 64 different polygons have different outcomes. Like I said 100 less turns and a geometric shape had a 30% increase in output, I even took off a few more turns to see where we where and it dropped back down to 76%, so that tells me the reaction was just beginning so adding turns would increase output by some factor.
Timing of the coil can be modified thru geometry, because each turn will fire in order thus pushing the field around.
I do think that some electronics IE, caps resistors or diodes will enhance the project, its worth a shot but ill get in to it after I get this next one made.
Mav
If you want a vortexing magnetic fields it is much easier than phasing coils. Gaped torrid coils will cause magnetic vortex spin as will just magnet gaped coil. See the Green's Camelot motor for information and proofs on this at this link.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hkgyY47duCM
Then if this is needed we could place pickup coils in physical paths of magnetic spins and harvest it.
If you make a Camelot ring perhaps filling in the empty space with a quartz piece wrapped as a pickup coil and placing a load powered buy these coil ends will allow use of the vortex.
Quote from: Hope on September 06, 2011, 08:20:08 AM
If you want a vortexing magnetic fields it is much easier than phasing coils. Gaped torrid coils will cause magnetic vortex spin as will just magnet gaped coil. See the Green's Camelot motor for information and proofs on this at this link.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hkgyY47duCM
Then if this is needed we could place pickup coils in physical paths of magnetic spins and harvest it.
If you make a Camelot ring perhaps filling in the empty space with a quartz piece wrapped as a pickup coil and placing a load powered buy these coil ends will allow use of the vortex.
Yes, but phaseing the coil is part of the process, Ethier with electronics, or geometry or both, getting the field to move around in a smoother, more powerfull motion inceases your turn around on the pickup coil, like our secondary which is our pickup coil.
If your #1-36 turns are every 10 degrees around the 360 degree toroid then your #37-72 turns will have a diffrent phase in them cause it takes time for the power to cycle thru the turns each turn has a diffrent phase, so the trick I would suspect and its just a hypothesis is getting the field collapse to happen faster by aligning your turns to reflect something of what jack said about the electronics.
so if have 9 turns in every ten degree mark, then the power will have to travel around 9 times around the core to get to back to the number 1 turn and start the cycle over again, or sinewave, verses helical which would just be 1 cycle thru 360 turns.
Alright, now I understand this vortex. Can't a gaped coil pulsed with dc make a strong magnetic vortex as well. Then a overlaying gaped coil pulsed with the opposite DC charge at the same time should be able to attract this first coils field up, right? The gap on the secondary may have to be either near the first gap or 180 degrees out.
And please tell me what a gabby is? It is a term we don't use in the USA except for someone (like me) who talks a lot. OR Gabby Hayes.
Also every working aether device I have seen on the net seems to have an antenna of some type to gather quickly the aether charge. Is this not needed with this device? Even the renown Nicolas Tesla needed them on his device. When the coil shorting expert works his magic he too uses an antenna and he is using a sort of phasing of his fields by shorting quickly the fields and his device is a now days working unit. Why isn't it necessary for us to use one?
a Gabby is short for Gabriel Device.
HOPE ...
Whos to say the secondary coil isnt an antenna, I mean ..it certainly is picking up aether-like energy in an unknown fashion, right? Antenna!--viola.
I didn't want to be the first one to say it but what if its all condensed in to one deal antenna generator vortex, just a thought...
I can see that as an antenna. But lets make a surface plane antenna not within a isolated metal doughnut and feed the secondary it's bounce back needs with it so the path of least resistance is enhanced to see if we can make 8X into the next multiple. Lots of devices seem to hit 8X and those that go on to the higher increases have an antenna outside the device.
Mav, I know this is important and also it seems like it sidelines the gabby a bit but in the long run this idea will be of benefit to lots of devices once we Gok the true principles making this unit work. Science now knows main vortexes have small mini vortexes all over them which correspond to harmonics, the elements are bound to harmonics so why not figure a way to include this knowledge to an advantage?
Also, to you all, I am negotiating with a company in China to get far better pricing on nano crystalline cores and will have more news as they make an offer tomorrow (I hope). I want to place two cores at 90 degree angles in the primary and secondaries which should reveal if vortexes can be modified and a gain can be modulated and captured. It is like phasing but with physics + HV. Perhaps just placing a spark plug in the center of a nano cry. core would make energy generate then be captured in the ultra core covered by a doughnut BUT the secondary could have a winding that is FED by an antenna outside the shell. You have a core you can check this with? I am waiting on my core purchase until I get an answer from China.(they have USA distributors already)
Its been a long day and i have worked hard so good night you all.
Still working on the outer shells of the tube style as I have time to gitter dun.
Inner core feels very attractive. Got pics Ill put up this week
Been thinking, considering the classical flux analysis pdf, there may be another way of using toroids. 2.
1 inner and 1 larger in diameter. The larger dia should be maybe thinner or less attractive than the inner core as to not attract the sec field. If we have a really attractive inner core, there should not be much escape for the sec field. Im assuming with the right spacing between the inner and outer core, the primary(outer,thinner core) field will easily cut the sec core windings, but the sec should remain attached to the inner core and not bother the primary.
This is something I can accomplish with less work its taking to produce the straight cores the way Im doing it. Im planning a 3in od inner core and a wire primary core.
If this works, cooling will be a breeze. ;] And changes can be done to either core without a complete tear down to rewind the inner core. ;] I have a good feeling about this.
I know car audio amps mostly use toroid transformers in their power supplies, and mostly not shielded. So is there much of anything radiating from the core(transformer) while pulling 50 amps from the 12v battery? Let alone 10 amps or 2.
There may be a possibility of a need for a thin shield between the cores, and it would probably allow for closer proximity between the cores. Still an easier try and test process. ;]
Mags
Oh, also, I have seen some pics and vids of a primary wound around the outside of e core transformers. I dont know if it works but I imagine the need to have some separation of sec and pri on the sides that the inner(sec) winding is exposed. Shielding? Some of the perm sheets?
But this is how the tube style should work also. The E transformer would be an easy experiment. ;]
The sec field stays within the core, thus not cutting the primary. Hopefully my tube style will work as I imagine.
Mags, you can order nano perm sheets at $10 a pop at Goldmine Electronics. Look in the "Magnets" section.
Hey Hope
I saw them. The site has some neat stuff. And at that price, everyone should have a sheet. ;]
Has anyone ever seen an E core transformer, that has a band of copper around the outside of the transformer, in the same direction as the windings, then soldered where it meets to create 1 big fat shorted outside winding?
Well I have. As I spoke of in a previous post, that I have seen people winding wire around in a similar fashion as a primary winding. So what can we learn from this?
So what is the function of the copper strap? To kill high freq from the magnetically exposed sides of the transformer?
Is the copper strap, being in close proximity to the exposed winding sides, taking power from the transformer as a shorted single turn secondary winding? Or is it just stopping radio waves because of freq involved?
Even though, I find it intriguing if the strap doesnt pull a LOT of power, if any, from the transformer as waist. Or does it? If not, then it seems like a shield, if winding a primary around the outside of the transformer, may not be needed. ;]
So maybe winding around the outside of the transformer has some merit. The transformers I have seen with straps are in pc power supplies and other supplies. I cant imagine that anyone would consider the strap for power losses. Not purposefully anyway. Hmmm lol
Its possible that if a surge were to be encountered through the transformer, that possibly the surge, if it saturates the core, will be absorbed by strappy, and not get to the vital stuff avoiding damage.
Mags
Been checking on devices with 180 degree coils phasing with each other. This is one of the things Stan Meyers did also. And Mr T too along with Ed Leeds thoughts on all magnets can be polarized like light. Then there is W Russell saying gravity is 90 degree in opposition to matter. So if we can try something like this we may find out why they liked it as well.
Mags, when you start playing with tube inside tube, try also inner tube as primary. Magnetic field of a tube is denser in the inside than outside so field outside should reach further and field inside tube is closer to core. If distance is correct then maybe this is an easy way to make one way induction, primary reaches further than secondary can reach back ?
If this works, then how about adding a third layer, you would take power from each layer and perhaps connecting outputs of two secondary layers together. They must be connected properly as sec 1 and sec 2 will be in opposite phase.
Weird idea just occurred to me, how about using air core primary winding that is placed inside nanoperm tube and your secondary wrapped around nanoperm ? From flux creation point of view it does not matter if the core is inside or outside coil ? Nanoperm core would capture all magnetic field from primary and little or no flux should reflect back from secondary. And even if it does then as there is no core effect would be close to zero.
Hey Jack
well, Mav has shown that input to the inner secondary doesnt induce current in the outer primary. This is a good thing.
In a normal transformer, when current is flowing in a loaded, not open secondary, the sec field causes the primary to flow more current than if the sec were open. As the sec load is increased to pull more current, the primary allows more current from input as the sec current goes up.
So, we want the primary field directed to a core that allows the primary field to CROSS the secondary windings, while preventing the field, that the secondary produces, to cross the primary winding.
So it is like a magnetic diode or rectification, a 1 way street that we are trying to create.
In a way, I like the shell model. But I can see that it may need liquid cooling, and a rewind is a pain. So, since I have my mind set on how the windings fields propagate with cores, with the help of the classical flux analysis pdf, Im getting better at seeing what is going on with different configurations.
I have seen a thread here that shows a flux gate core setup drawn, and it has arrows showing the magnetic polarity of each leg of the core. It would be better to show what is happening in the open spaces between the legs, like in the doughnut hole of a toroid. Thats where all the big action is, this is where fields developed by each winding is able to cut the windings on the other parts of the core.
I have a nice little toroid wound with many turns of fine wire that Im going to test for induction in 1 wire going through the core and a wire near and on the outer diameter and see what I see. Im hoping for lots more on the one going through the core, and hopefully near to none on the outside, especially none at some small distance away. So if we have all this action on the doughnut hole, then a larger diameter core for the primary, should do the same, all primary action in the circle, and cutting the sec winding on the way. But the sec field would remain in the sec core doughnut hole, not cutting the primary windings.
If these things all work out, say the primary pulls 1 amp when the sec is not loaded, then when you load the sec, the primary current should decrease, because loading the sec causes the input to see an increased inductance, thus lower input. ;]
Im beginning to see that if you have an air gap in a core, 1mm, 5mm, what ever, if you wind a coil over that area, it seems it may be easy to rectify the direction of flux there.
If the coil were powered to allow flow, it just may be good enough to simulate no gap at all, but reverse the polarity of the coil and it can have a tremendous affect on closing that gate, not allowing the source field to pass the gap.
Mags
Mavendex have you or has anyone here ever wrapped a PVC pipe of >10" in a rodin config. ? If it would throw all its field inside the pipe then we may be able to use a nano perm BAR wound in wire to capture nearly all that field. This field could be generated efficiently with the SSB (auto freq radiant charger). So by forcing the rodin to contain is field we may be able to use it's high efficient geometry to an advantage.
.... try it and find out :)
Well, more bismuth is needed to cover my 4 inch secondary toroid.. so that was ordered from ebay, and should arrive next week on Monday or Tuesday.
@ Magluvin.. I really enjoyed reading your train-of-thought in your last post and look forward to your next one.
I was reading an old 1950's article on the behavior of Bismuth in a molten state.. and apparently Bismuth loses its "Hall" effect when molten at temps,.. above 270 F , I believe.
So I had an idea of what I could do to influence Bismuths crystalline structure when it is in its molten state.
I Believe it may be possible to change the relative permeability of the Bloch walls in the lattice structure to one of more permanent 'superconducting behavior' by inducing a 432 hz frequency within the wires of the coil while it cools from its molten state.
Bismuth has properties that cause it to shrink as it is heated and expands as it cools.
My hypothesis is that doing this Thereby 'imprinting' a magnetic signature within the bloch walls will cause whatever bemf response within the bismuth shell, to negate any hysteresis loss in the wire(s). It will be interesting to see what effect if any on the physical crystalline structure of Bismuth from a charged coil as the bismuth slowly cools.
I am very excited, and have a good feeling about working with bismuth because #1 of its diamagnetic properties.
#2 its low melting/forming temp.
#3 its likely viable resource in antigravitics and cop>1
Here's a Great video below! >>
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=glRuwV9IlaY&list=FL5KpO41Adst261NqgEfR9GQ&index=2
Quote from: AmericanMan31 on September 08, 2011, 01:58:43 PM
I am very excited, and have a good feeling about working with bismuth because #1 of its diamagnetic properties.
#2 its low melting/forming temp.
#3 its likely viable resource in antigravitics and cop>1
yes :)
I reviewed the EBM generator (Electricity By Movement) so this is what is working already. We must spin the inner or outer coil physically or both in opposite directions. Share this if you want. (And God's spirit MOVED upon the face of the waters) It's surface tension is disrupted and it uses natural energies to reform this surface tension. It is the same with all organized matter.
It is called cohesive disruption and nature uses it's abundant energy to rebuild this cohesion. Same with coil shorting it just a different wavelength that has a nature surface cohesion and is disrupted and returns to a surface cohesion using natural energies. We commonly call it surface tension when it is water we are working with.
We COULD make a solid state device but it would require nano sized wire windings to get high efficiency out of it. But just spinning one or both wound cores will do it cheaper with all partials interacting. Disrupting there cohesive balance they have achieved acting on each other in the static (non moving) condition.
So Mavendex you were VERY correct that we have to make vortex action and this is simple if we just physically spin the coil(s).
Hello I have found out that my previous design had a very low perm inner core, and hence little voltage was being transferred across..
I have had a new core built up with a perm of 61k.
The design is attached, let me know what you guys think
Matthew
Hey Mat
Very interesting, that cross section view.. All these cores are square edged?
hmm, I wonder if round would be a better choice if available. Maybe have the square machined down. There is a lot of room in the shell being wasted and maybe a problem.
To me, I would want no voids as I see in your drawing. Not faulting you here. ;]
Thanks for showing
@American
Thanks. There may be many ways of doing this. And Im weird. ;D It just seems that many have tried the shell and seems only Mav has anything really going but not satisfied yet. So pondering a different geometry may just take a little thinking and trials. But Im feeling good about the alternatives more as I think about it.
Mags
@Magluvin
I believe all the cores that are made from strips are square, though a circle would be much preferred.
Quote from: Hope on September 08, 2011, 05:44:55 PM
So Mavendex you were VERY correct that we have to make vortex action and this is simple if we just physically spin the coil(s).
You don't need to physically spin the coils, just recycle that energy. lets imagine a single pulse of juice, and you have 10 degree sections wrapped around your core, and their is 9 turns per section equaling out to be 360 turns, obviously there is more to it but this is the nuts and bolts of it.
So that one pulse will have to travel around the core 9 times before it leaves thru the neutral. now that's fluid movement of a magnetic field, so lets go a step further cause the term for 36 sided polygon is dodecagon, lets make it a bit easier buy going lets say a hexagon, now we get around 60 turns per section that same pulse has to travel 60 times around the toroid before it can leave thru the neutral.
Verses the helical turns, which with that same single pulse, it only goes around 1 time.
Helical turns will also give diminishing returns, where geometric turns have a bit more of a advantage.
The only thing I have noticed of a advantage on helical turns is that it lowers the power factor, where geometric turns make it go up. its a non issue tho cause you use less actual power and get more power out with geometric turns. I have about 3 experiments so far that tell this story.
@ Mags Ill never be satisfied :P
Mav
PS. We will vacuum seal the inner toroid so not only is it isolated from the outer coil, and the shells are isolated from each other, but now we have isolated the inner core from pressure as well. Actually its been done already and has some interesting effects but we will look at that more in the future.
Thank you Mavendex for sharing that rotational info with us.
AND MATTHEW That drawing is great! Thanks
Private licensing on a per individual basis would help gain royalties on each unit produced. Allowing others able to build and place these devices into societies hands. This will build common belief that it is not impossible and also insure getting these devices to people who can quantify the results and create working formulas so science will have to accept the idea. Taking back to mankind what has always been here but was suppressed. Other wise what has happened to hundreds of these devices will happen again, suppression.
Why the rubbing of magnetic fields gain so much is do to disruption of cohesion, you disturb the natural balance and nature brings its own powers to regain that balance. This is the same with any physical matter (any part of creation) imbalance. These antennas placed on devices, when this disturbance takes place, then the natural balance occurs and the antenna just collecting the back flow when nature is trying to balance again.
Mavendex after seeing what you meant by making the force travel around the core, why can't we coil the wire many turns on the outside edge and make a form doing the same that will place the windings near the inner edge of the core like the first outside but inside the toriod? This way we can have hundreds of orbits of the same work force. Then we may just be able to put pickup coils on the top and bottom of the same core.? Or maybe we will have to use top and outside for input then bottom and center for output. (I know, I know you will mostly tell me to build it and see) I can't yet until my cores arrive. But IF I can get this home repair done soon I will build the magnet ring core and try it with that and get regular ferrite powder and build a core too.
Quote from: Mavendex on September 09, 2011, 06:52:53 AM
PS. We will vacuum seal the inner toroid so not only is it isolated from the outer coil, and the shells are isolated from each other, but now we have isolated the inner core from pressure as well. Actually its been done already and has some interesting effects but we will look at that more in the future.
Hey Mav
I think the absence of air inside might not allow heat from the inner core/sec to escape as wellas with air(gas). Maybe higher pressure? Oil? Like in an ignition coil, the oil helps to transfer heat to the outer casing.
Well its friday.. Im going to do some tests on the tube setup and some on the toroid in toroid.
Was thinking on the shell model, as to what goes on in the doughnut hole of the sec with the shell and primary in the way . If the sec field just wraps around the inner circle of the shell without penetrating, then I think its a good thing for the toroid in toroid also. We dont want the primary field to cross the sec winding as a whole, just the side facing outward mostly. Will explain later.. ;]
Back to the daily grind, lunch is over.
Mags
Quote from: AmericanMan31 on September 06, 2011, 03:17:37 PM
HOPE ...
Whos to say the secondary coil isnt an antenna, I mean ..it certainly is picking up aether-like energy in an unknown fashion, right? Antenna!--viola.
Well, since my focus is mainly on theoretical research, and patents are easy to access, and that some patent approximately follow what is currently being studied, take a look at this:
http://www.google.com/patents?id=uhU1AAAAEBAJ&printsec=abstract&zoom=4#v=onepage&q&f=false
(Fig. 14 on pg. 5 of the patent has a device which arguably wasn't designed to be OU. I encourage all readers to continue looking for ways to tweak your designs until you can't go further or else find your answers to your questions. Tesla patented some of his currently investigated designs on this site, so there's potential to be uncovered by experimentation.)
--Lee
OK Lee your right. I got a clear picture of what is going on with this natural sea of energy now. Everything has a natural cohesion to like atoms (similar to water surface tension) But all wavelengths have it. So when we disrupt it, it re-balances using it's own energy. If we disrupt the electrical properties say using voltage spike (the higher the voltage the more energy types it disrupts, the more the potential differences the more the disruption). Like the bigger the rock we throw in the pond the bigger the splash and no only in the water but splashes on the shores too. So all we have to do to use this natural re-balancing energy which is coming thru the air (bad conductor) is provide it with a good conductor that doesn't become saturated (we have an antenna that is attached to a load which provides a path that is less resistant than the air) if it does become saturated there is no potential difference and the flow stops using it, and uses the air again or another less resistant path. So HV disrupts the cohesion, this imbalance is a potential difference. Nature flows to balance the potential difference, we make a path and work to keep this path less resistant than the air. BINGO we get to use natural energy (of course we may have to keep the spark gap going to keep disruptions causing a potential difference). Perhaps just the loads draw can keep it flowing?? Now this is how it is done and I believe we can all make devices using this principle.
Quote from: Hope on September 11, 2011, 03:36:08 AM
OK Lee your right.
@Hope
Concerning the rest of your post: I hadn't thought of the OU process like that, but I think I understand a majority of what you said.
I do mostly low voltage experiments of a simple nature (as I understand "simple") on my research Bench at the bottom of www.OverUnityResearch.com .
(The Bench has the same name as my handle here, namely, the_big_m_in_ok.)
I myself am looking for answers, just like the Members here. Keep at it.
--Lee
So can we use our ultra perm cores then to conduct the re-balancing natural energies. Why not just spark gap and disassociate the cohesion fields of the surrounding natural energies? (I know, I know try it and see) but I wanted to gain from others experimentation to accelerate the project development. I really like having a load on the secondary side to keep saturation from stopping the flow of that which we may be gaining.
nul-points, thank you for your direction and willingness to help all us here. And you Mavendex for your assistance in leading this topic. Are you NDA hampered or can you share all you know? Can you now explain more concisely how the device is working?
Steve do you see this secondary as attracting natural energies or phase compressions from the primary?
Quote from: Hope on September 11, 2011, 10:23:31 PM
And you Mavendex for your assistance in leading this topic. Are you NDA hampered or can you share all you know? Can you now explain more concisely how the device is working?
Its a open source project I share mostly what I know and how to tweak it cause I build them, Im not a EE, or a PHD, I ask questions like everyone else but more or less I end up having to learn on my own. There is no NDA its my invention that I have shared.
Just something to think about for the builders out there, how many magnetic fields do you think are present in this device? I have a idea but would like to hear what you guys have to say about it.
3
I also agree. I think it is 3 ..or either divisible by three.
Perhaps one being 'compression'>><<
the second being decompression<<>>
and the THIRD being a contructive/deconstructive
'TIME-COMPONENT'?
I havent the slightest theory as to 'why', but a strong intuition for sure! :)
primary - shield -secondary
the delay in shield make lenz response lag by 90 degrees if done correctly and if I understood Tesla
what that means I think you know
just a few thought/theory from an ordinary guy like me :D
have no way to test it , would have to large capacitance to match primary and secondary in my case , maybe later I will test it but don't expect much. I focus on possible working units with no extraordinary parts
Each turn of either the primary or secondary is a field producer, err, expander. ;] And every portion of each turn produces field when current flows.
So, how many fields are produced?
Hey Forest ;]
What did you find with you wire core transformer you made a while back? Anything interesting?
Mags
Quote from: Magluvin on September 13, 2011, 05:51:47 PM
Each turn of either the primary or secondary is a field producer, err, expander. ;] And every portion of each turn produces field when current flows.
So, how many fields are produced?
Hey Forest ;]
What did you find with you wire core transformer you made a while back? Anything interesting?
Mags
Mags
No time to check.It's laying on my desk waiting for it's time. I'm slow in doing anything.I don't expect much mostly because inductance of secondary is very tiny due to core made from the same iron wire.I I had ferrite torroid at least... :-[
Those shell halves must be separated and if they accidentially touch there will be arc ? I recall something like that was mentioned earlier.
What happens if you connect two wires directly from the shell to a load, lets say CFL ? Is there any power ? What happens in primary/secondary in this case, does COP change ? If there is no effect then howabout putting two caps in series, one in each output wire and connect those in a load ?
Mav...my answer is 4. Two forward and two back.
Quote from: Jack Noskills on September 14, 2011, 02:04:28 AM
Those shell halves must be separated and if they accidentially touch there will be arc ? I recall something like that was mentioned earlier.
What happens if you connect two wires directly from the shell to a load, lets say CFL ? Is there any power ? What happens in primary/secondary in this case, does COP change ? If there is no effect then how about putting two caps in series, one in each output wire and connect those in a load ?
in the original version, it had 4 spot welds while the rest of the shell wasn't connected those spot welds would have acted as really crappy capacitors, but capacitors none the less.
I should add that the effect was present but weather it was enhancing or hindering that I can not say.
sorry for another edit but you can never have enough capacitance for a amplifier am I right
http://www.crutchfield.com/p_120HCAP40/Tsunami-HCAP-40.html?search=capacitor&tp=2614&tab=detailed_info
Things that make you go hummmm...
http://www.physics.sfsu.edu/~lockhart/courses/P230L27.pdf yup this would solve any other heating issue, apply extra output via cap and possibly make the exchange of energies even more efficient. This Idea has promise good one Jack!
Man Ideas are just flowing now, So instead of hooking it up to the output of the transformer, we could hook it up to another device or possibly use it to close the loop. mmmmmmmmm must get crutchfield :::Homer Simpson Voice::::
Eight fields, two per piece. If you take iron filings and place them on a thin sheet of paper over each coil you will be able to see the eddy valleys at a given frequency and wattage. The tall filing piles are the north type poles the shallow piles will be the south type poles but on the bottom the reverse is true. (you can't turn it over to do the bottom else it changes into the same as the top ones). 2 cores + 2 half doughnuts X 2 fields = 6 fields or if phase changing on the steel halves then it will be 8 fields.
You can PROVE this to yourselves if you do all of Ed Leedsklalins course on magnets. I will really help anyone serious about using magnetic fields.
edited
The way I see it, its 1 innercore + 1 innercoil + 2 Shell halves + 1 outercoil = 5
but its just a guess I would think Mags has the true answer that each turn is magnetic field ect ect ....
Im really liking the super cap btw, the amperage from the cap won't flow back in to the transformer cause if you wind it down with some fine wire to make voltage as high as possible, A. the resistance would be too great and it would go to the path of least resistance, and B. when a person winds the inner core like that then nothing will come back out the primary effectively making the output of the secondary core nothing more than a frequency + voltage and the load can take its needs from the supercap.
Intriguing Idea after I get this one finished definitely going to test voltage potential between the two shells and the shell halves them selves could potentially have two supercaps each attached to each shell mmmmmmmm this is getting really fun and off the rails at the same time.
6 volts + 1 Farad = 1 amp
ok, goof stuff Mav. Here is something more to ponder about with caps in case they are not already in your todo list,
Connect shell halves with one cap, then take two outputs and put caps in series there. I think resonance would have an effect here but could be difficult to find, so testing with different size of caps could be usefull. Anyway when putting caps in series big caps are needed when using low frequency signal.
Short the secondary and get power through those caps instead. Shorting will give high current and thus high magnetic field, maybe this has a positive effect.
If you have function generator, what happens if frequency of input is increased to lets say 1 khz. I know Eddy currents will heat the core, but if Eddy's are now sucked out will this still be the case ? Higher frequency would also mean lower capacity caps would be needed.
Shooting in the dark as usual but when you shoot long enough you are bound to hit something. Atleast the foot anyway.
shooting in the dark is fun, the supercap is a great idea, especially when your siphoning a loss and making it in to a gain in more ways that one, its one of those win win win scenarios, not only are you creating the necessary amperage for your load via eddys, but when you do that you diminish the eddys which lessens the skin effect that they produce in the shell making the magnetic field well up and provide more energies to the secondary, at the same time heat will be diminished, and last but deffinitly not least since the load is taking its amps from the cap and not the secondary one would expect that the transformer would act as it would while being unloaded because the secondary is supplying the voltage/frequency only and the amps come via cap which is taking away the losses which make the transformer more efficient power factor would be in the .07 range so everything that your using to create the energy is going back to the source and fountains of energy are coming out the backend.
This is a very very very good idea and I commend you on it!
In a way its like making a all new type of energy and would effectively be called Direct AC
[Those shell halves must be separated and if they accidentially touch there will be arc ? I recall something like that was mentioned earlier.
What happens if you connect two wires directly from the shell to a load, lets say CFL ? Is there any power ? What happens in primary/secondary in this case, does COP change ? If there is no effect then howabout putting two caps in series, one in each output wire and connect those in a load ?]
Thats EXACTLY what I want to know too, Jack. ;)
...Why wouldnt we be able to power a load?
Here is some coil information (general type) for all to use, it should help anyone winding or in resonance seeking (planning).
http://www.mhw-intl.com/assets/CSC/CSC%20Design%20Formulas%202011.pdf
I realised the other day why Tesla used iron wire in his trafo patent that used quarant phasing, it is there to capture the back EMF of the secondary so that it does not reach the core.
Then I played with this in my head and I came up with this possible improvement, I am not sure if this is correct place to post but it has same components as gabby so it is close enough.
Lets say the toroid is wound first with relatively fine wire so that coil will be atleast 10 mm thick. On top of this primary a coarser wire is wound which is sorted, this would be intermediate coil. On top of this the output coil is wound using iron wire. Purpose of iron is to capture back EMF of intermediate wire so that primary does not see it and generate power from it. So iron coil would be core and a coil at the same time.
Now what happens here ? Primary and secondary fluxes would be in same direction so if secondary flux reaches the core it would not oppose it, primary current should go down. Intermediate coil would run at its full speed providing high EMF as there would be low resistance, this EMF would then feed the iron coil as it is closer to it than primary core which is atleast 10 mm away. The more back EMF iron coil would produce the more it would help the primary and reduce current there.
What is your opinion, could it be this simple ?
If anyone has iron wire at hand I see this test worthwhile the effort. Baseline to test against would be first to use only two copper coils, a normal trafo. Then add iron coil and use it as a back EMF collector as Tesla did and finally try the same by shorting intermediate coil. Number of turns would need to be high in every coil, atleast thousand. Maybe iron coil would need even more turns, experimenting needed here.
BTW, this intermediate coil can be connected to output if placed in correct way but I am not sure if it would help in this setup.
Like the idea Jack,
Kinda makes me think of a way to transfer a ringing coil's output to a secondary as well. What would happen if we spark gapped this iron wired winding's output as the primary was peaking it's ac waveform? We could send it thru a HV diode and charge a plate on a capacitor which the other cap plate is connected to the secondary thru a loose winding which would (phase match) act as a squeezing force while the secondary was saturated.
Only place for this HV ring to go would be to the secondary. Since this iron winding is highly permeable there would be a high degree of current that could not be transferred back to the primary due to saturation with the original pulses still. (Especially if we included DC in the input pulse.) Good thoughts Jack.
Hello Jack,
this idea can be tested easily by using a standart-12 V-Toroid-Transformer which has no epoxy-filling in the the center of the core. You short the secondary coil and wrap the ironwire on the outside.
One problem is that there is no isolated ironwire available so this is extra work. You have to either wind the ironwire in such a way that the windings do not touch each other or apply isolating-resin on the outer ironwire after
finishing the winding.
In order to vary the parameters you can tap the secondary coil at different numbers of winding. The secondary winding
has about 90 windings, so you can tap after 30 and another tap at 60 windings and short it there..
Use a variac and slowly increase the primary voltage while you watch the voltage at a load connected to the iron-wire including phase-shift ( primary voltage to current )
Regards
Kator01
I am unable to do these kind of tests. I was hoping someone could try this out and post some results, working/not working...
I have just posted a validation of a vortex magnetic spin video clip and need some input as to why this is possible and is there any way to image this with out water ??? Al.. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y7Xc9VHbXl8
Yes Jack, I will be doing a lot of testing. I also feel that ratios of physical distances play a large part in all devices and especially in keeping with congruent magnetic waves. Phasing can be thought of and manipulated with positive and less positive dc pulses. (you can call it negative dc if you wish) All matter really is like a perspective view. We all know this about heat, that there isn't really cold it is just less heat. Cold is a relative term which means negative heat or less than we are at.
Physics way of thinking is all matter is either north (more)or south (less)of our surrounding norm.
I kinda get this from Ed Leeds and Walter Russell theories. Walter saw it all and understood the complete cycle. But he did not correlate total disintegration as the same as total creation. It is due to our 3D view point. Matter at the zero point begins merging with 4D which re creates it into 3D fully recharged with all wavelengths. This 3 and 4 d barrier keeps apart that way. So you could say in a way one is more or less of the other.
Of course Tesla could see it from a more complete ideal: 1 = a higher charge, 2 = the at norm charge , or 3 = a lower charge. So many people read about his OCD regarding the trio and being divisible by it. But I doubt many correlate what he was meaning overall. What he knew was safe was complete cycles, not like many devices used today.
Quote from: Acca on September 19, 2011, 03:55:53 PM
I have just posted a validation of a vortex magnetic spin video clip and need some input as to why this is possible and is there any way to image this with out water ??? Al.. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y7Xc9VHbXl8
This is phenomenal! THANK YOU for sharing what you found.
It also explains why the metal spheres dropped in a mine shaft grouped together while falling. The were passing thru natural occurring magnetic fields and generated a charge with vortex-ed with the fields. It is mentioned in this paper:
http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~noelh/Energy%20Suppression.htm
Hi Acca,
Thank you for bringing that video to attention it opens new areas to research. Instead of water maybe try the smoke from an incense stick.
Quote from: Acca on September 19, 2011, 03:55:53 PM
I have just posted a validation of a vortex magnetic spin video clip and need some input as to why this is possible and is there any way to image this with out water ??? Al.. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y7Xc9VHbXl8
I didn't look too close but ran accross this and thought it might be relevant...
Quote from: Acca on September 19, 2011, 03:55:53 PM
I have just posted a validation of a vortex magnetic spin video clip and need some input as to why this is possible and is there any way to image this with out water ??? Al.. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y7Xc9VHbXl8
Good catch! like ive been saying if we are making a vortex to make it better it should be wound as such move with the field and it will generate a better outcome.
Mav
Quote from: Jack Noskills on September 19, 2011, 05:29:00 AM
I realised the other day why Tesla used iron wire in his trafo patent that used quarant phasing, it is there to capture the back EMF of the secondary so that it does not reach the core.
Then I played with this in my head and I came up with this possible improvement, I am not sure if this is correct place to post but it has same components as gabby so it is close enough.
Lets say the toroid is wound first with relatively fine wire so that coil will be atleast 10 mm thick. On top of this primary a coarser wire is wound which is sorted, this would be intermediate coil. On top of this the output coil is wound using iron wire. Purpose of iron is to capture back EMF of intermediate wire so that primary does not see it and generate power from it. So iron coil would be core and a coil at the same time.
Now what happens here ? Primary and secondary fluxes would be in same direction so if secondary flux reaches the core it would not oppose it, primary current should go down. Intermediate coil would run at its full speed providing high EMF as there would be low resistance, this EMF would then feed the iron coil as it is closer to it than primary core which is atleast 10 mm away. The more back EMF iron coil would produce the more it would help the primary and reduce current there.
What is your opinion, could it be this simple ?
If anyone has iron wire at hand I see this test worthwhile the effort. Baseline to test against would be first to use only two copper coils, a normal trafo. Then add iron coil and use it as a back EMF collector as Tesla did and finally try the same by shorting intermediate coil. Number of turns would need to be high in every coil, atleast thousand. Maybe iron coil would need even more turns, experimenting needed here.
BTW, this intermediate coil can be connected to output if placed in correct way but I am not sure if it would help in this setup.
Coat hanger wire is already enameled and is of the proper gauge it would take some time to make each and every single loop tho, So just go buy some coat hangers and make it happen :)
Quote from: Acca on September 19, 2011, 03:55:53 PM
I have just posted a validation of a vortex magnetic spin video clip and need some input as to why this is possible and is there any way to image this with out water ??? Al.. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y7Xc9VHbXl8
Hi ACCA
very good video link
and i can not prevent me to replicate the effect and it works very well
and now what can we do with this spinning vortex ?? perhaps a new thread ??
good luck at all
Laurent
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CoBNfEyOiBs
Hey Woopy
How have you been? ;] Try a little salt in the water.. Should be more bubbles and more effect. I remember some movie that a submarine was propelled like this, silently. In salt water. ;]
Mags
I stumbled on this on youtube today, wonder what you guys think:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aVYiT4zK9Kc&NR=1
It is a type of bi-toroid trafo, so seems relevant here. Anyway, he is claiming over 300% OU...
cheers, Steve
more thane oriented stuff joule, I would think we are past this at this point maybe draw more influence it to the direction of what aacc was going about I actually have a couple of very large magnets available I will test to see if we can make it work with what we have.
Mave
Quote from: JouleSeeker on September 20, 2011, 07:31:47 PM
I stumbled on this on youtube today, wonder what you guys think:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aVYiT4zK9Kc&NR=1
It is a type of bi-toroid trafo, so seems relevant here. Anyway, he is claiming over 300% OU...
cheers, Steve
Doc, that is Thane Hines. www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7833.0
Quote from: Magluvin on September 20, 2011, 07:00:58 PM
Hey Woopy
How have you been? ;] Try a little salt in the water.. Should be more bubbles and more effect. I remember some movie that a submarine was propelled like this, silently. In salt water. ;]
Mags
Hi Mag
I am fine thank's.
Working those last weeks on the christmas motor at "heretical builders.com "
But always following the great work here.
I did a second test with some backing soda and the neomag separated from the plate .
The vortex is there.
I don't want to disturb here. Is this vortex relevant to this thread, and if yes why ?
Thank's
Laurent
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_0SDO_Prp-c
"Is the vortex electrolysis relevant to this forum?"
Well.. No, and yes.
It is not a likely function that the gabby may directly influence efficiency in electrolysis; However, the two seperated shells may serve some purpose in a capacitive/electrolysis manner (that would be REALLY cool to see) which, I would imagine form a vortex of bubbles in the equatorial region and the center also. I have done the neo-spinning vortex experiment myself and it shows indeed that the ions set up a rotating field when electricity is applied, AND NOT a static field as so many have previously thought. This is exciting and I believe the effect will ultimately lead to better electrolysis design for "H" production..even cop>1. If a mix of Stanley Myers coupled with the spinning-neo-vortex or Stiffler circuit setup could be implemented we may achieve a condition where hydrogen production can occur without the use of current (or little of it) used.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OFp7P472dK0
Quote from: Acca on September 19, 2011, 03:55:53 PM
I have just posted a validation of a vortex magnetic spin video clip and need some input as to why this is possible and is there any way to image this with out water ??? Al.. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y7Xc9VHbXl8
This is easily explained with force on current carrying wire.
Electrical current is running from the outside of the magnet to the center. If magnet has South on top then the magnetic field of the magnets will push water to the left. And this happens all around the magnet so water starts spinning.
Here is a picture for easier visualization:
Hey Mav, how goes your progress?
I am currently winding the primary of my 2000 turn secondary 18 gauge.
Should be able to get some results soon.
Matt
My progress is steady, finally got all the reflections out of the device for high power outputs. Found out that if you stack two nanoperms and put the machine together you get a cancellation effect making a 0 output either way you charge the device which was very interesting. So I took it out of balance and am getting perfect results, IE no voltage drops on the secondary while loaded no reflection in either amps or power factor while the secondary is loaded, all Im doing now is boosting my voltages on the secondary atm to see how high she will go.
No sweat right just takes a little elbow grease and a can do attitude.
"Think for yourself man, don't do like they do, its a sick world you just gotta stay true, stay true and everything will be cool. You gotta blaze your own trails and make your own rules." (Kottenmouth Kings)
Quote from: Mavendex on September 28, 2011, 10:25:38 AMFound out that if you stack two nanoperms and put the machine together
Wow !...great to see someone is trying my idea a while back of using two nanoperms together. I take it by 0 you are meaning nil results rather than a power factor of 0 ?
Quote from: Mavendex on September 28, 2011, 10:25:38 AMSo I took it out of balance and am getting perfect results
This is great news ! I take it that this is still using the two nanoperms together ? Could you elaborate on what you mean by taking it out of balance ?
Quote from: Cheap4All on September 28, 2011, 04:48:34 PM
Wow !...great to see someone is trying my idea a while back of using two nanoperms together. I take it by 0 you are meaning nil results rather than a power factor of 0 ?This is great news ! I take it that this is still using the two nanoperms together ? Could you elaborate on what you mean by taking it out of balance ?
Ive been playing with multiple configurations to find the best route to make as much power as possible, according to some people by stacking the cores you increase your cross section and thus make more juice, well the initial try was a big fat fail cause I got 0 output in either direction, especially for about 1000 watts of input, and your are correct it was the output not the power factor that was 0. Although getting to a power factor of 0 is very very easy to do :) Getting it to stop reflecting well thats the hard part but still easy to do once you know the secret.
Bringing it out of balance means that since we have 2 innercores on the configuration our primary magnetic fields = our secondary which is what created the cancellation effect, by adding magnetic fields to the primary I was able to increase the output again. Magnetic field ratios, Quantum Gearing, what ever you want to call it that's whats happening, at least one of the functions.
:)
Quote from: Mavendex on September 28, 2011, 05:47:25 PMMagnetic field ratios, Quantum Gearing, what ever you want to call it that's whats happening
Many thanks for the prompt reply. Its starting to make sense to me ;D. Increasing the size/area of the secondary field mean't changes had to be made to the primary. Thus by doing just what you have done, by increasing the primary to offset the new secondary, the quantum gearing changes.
BUT more importantly the results you are now getting clearly seem to be heading in the direction that you wanted from day one. So its really good that all your hard work is starting to pay off. I just hope I can emulate your same result by using 240v which applies where I live.
Quote from: Mavendex on September 28, 2011, 10:25:38 AM
My progress is steady, finally got all the reflections out of the device for high power outputs. Found out that if you stack two nanoperms and put the machine together you get a cancellation effect making a 0 output either way you charge the device which was very interesting. So I took it out of balance and am getting perfect results, IE no voltage drops on the secondary while loaded no reflection in either amps or power factor while the secondary is loaded, all Im doing now is boosting my voltages on the secondary atm to see how high she will go.
No sweat right just takes a little elbow grease and a can do attitude.
"Think for yourself man, don't do like they do, its a sick world you just gotta stay true, stay true and everything will be cool. You gotta blaze your own trails and make your own rules." (Kottenmouth Kings)
Thanks for the update Mav
I just finished my coil last night and tested it.
Primary has about 200 turns and secondary about 2000 turns, 18 AWG
I tried various input voltages , but for one test.
I put 5V AC in at various frequencies from an amplifier.
The output voltage on no load is about 50V. And virtually no current flows in the primary.
When I put a load on, the voltage across the coil dropped, to about 5V on a 150 ohm load. and the current on the primary went up by 0.1A while on the secondary there was only 0.03A.
There was a slight delay of the secondary voltage compared to the primary , it was about 45 degrees, so not quite 90 degrees which is a power factor of 0.
Is there anything I am doing wrong?
thanks for any help
how thick is your shell? what size is the device? Did you isolate your shell halves? if you add more primary the power factor goes down.
Quote from: Mavendex on September 29, 2011, 08:55:40 AM
how thick is your shell? what size is the device? Did you isolate your shell halves? if you add more primary the power factor goes down.
Hello Mav I think its 2mm thick its a standard 3" mild steel donut.
My core is 122.9mm x 182.9mm x 30mm
2000 turns secondary 18 gauge
3" shell
200 turn primary 18 gauge
I have isolated my two shell halves.
I tried winding another 75 turns in the primary, and the secondary voltage increase hence power as well. No change to power factor.
Please see the attached photos the secondary is loaded with a 150 ohm resister. The voltage scale is 10V/div.
Red is primary voltage , yellow is secondary voltage, green is the two multiplied.
I found that the primary current is the same phase as the secondary voltage, so hence we can use green to measure power factor.
thanks for any information and help
Matthew
how many amps are you putting in to the device, Ive been using a variac.
Usually all I have to do is increase primary windings to lower the powerfactor, so not sure why your having a issue with it, my shells are also a bit thicker so that may be a issue as well.
Nice to see that the sinewave doesn't change which is nice:)
Mav will you please post some specific results of your endeavors. If you have a video to post on YouTube so much the better. I am near done with a large service project (my aching back, lol) and will be on this project more soon. If we can see your out comes then we can avoid the pitfalls and more ahead as a group. Thank you.
Quote from: Hope on September 30, 2011, 11:24:48 AM
Mav will you please post some specific results of your endeavors. If you have a video to post on YouTube so much the better. I am near done with a large service project (my aching back, lol) and will be on this project more soon. If we can see your out comes then we can avoid the pitfalls and more ahead as a group. Thank you.
I cycle thru them so quickly there is no one way to do it to make energy the simple fact that its possible should be enough, Currently I'm using intermediate or primary drivers to x out the reflections, shells drive down the power factor along with primary windings and multiple cores increase power out. (sort of)
My current configuration is 2k windings on the secondary, 100 turns of primary driver IE shorted primary winding, then shell then primary input windings, I am using 2 nanoperms and 1 set of shell to make it happen.
My next configuration will be 2k windings on the secondary single core 100 turns of primary driver then shell then as many windings as it takes to take to get it to 120, after that if everything goes well which it should I will move to 100 single turns of primary driver to see if that increases output voltage.
after that I intend to employ capacitors and a magnetic diode configuration.
What you should take from this is that the laws of physics are easily shattered and experimentation not AI is the way of the rule.
The laws of Physics are Gods laws not ours to think or act like we know all of them or how they all work is in fact a arrogance that needs to be rectified for our race to forward itself, if the armchair scientists or scientists in general can't get beyond this I fear that no matter what happens our species will fail. Learn to experiment!
As your great Tesla has said in the past.
Quote from: Mavendex on September 30, 2011, 08:08:30 PM100 turns of primary driver IE shorted primary winding
Hello Mav, Just a few questions on shorted primary to clarify:
(1) Is this wound directly over the secondary 2k and also right around the nanoperm/s ?
(2) Is it shorted to itself and independant, or shorted and connected to the primary ?
Why not place the primary within the center as the milky way does, and then pick up the secondary THRU a surrounding core (doughnut) (iron shell with connected to a nano perm central core)?? Nature knows the way. We want to see what you are saying Mav. To me it does not make a natural layout to go opposite of how nature does it. Please "show us" your working COP > 1 model in that we can replicate it. Salad bowls would even help capture with this design.
AND as far as EV Gray repulsion of plastic goes. Easy stuff. We learned how to magnetize ANY material in the first round of Ed Leeds theories. Why has no one replicated this yet?? If anyone needs to know how message me and I will share it. But when I do you will kick yourself for not remembering it yourselves. I want to understand your device as I believe we all do Mav. But where is a live presentation so we can replicate it? We could use a materials list and build specifics to make best use of our budgets right? Especially the watts IN and OUT. I have looked thru hours of messages to never find the "how" of the Gabriel device... Is there ANYONE out there who has made a single working replication exhibiting COP > 1? If so please post your build specs and results. My life has only so much time I can use in these efforts as many of us do. So please post all that you can to assist us into making Gabriel blow it's horn for the rest of us. Why should anyone of us spend needless monies just getting to your model. Let's maximize our resources and experiment beyond a working model.
Quote from: Cheap4All on October 01, 2011, 06:09:25 PM
Hello Mav, Just a few questions on shorted primary to clarify:
(1) Is this wound directly over the secondary 2k and also right around the nanoperm/s ?
(2) Is it shorted to itself and independant, or shorted and connected to the primary ?
(1) yes
(2) Independent - and shorted
(3) the other side effect of this is it drops the voltages on the secondary, So to boost voltages - either add to the secondary or experiment with this primary driver, so far I have added to the driver and it reduces voltages on the secondary even more, so Im chopping it up and making several drivers 15 turns a pop then shorting them, this way I keep my 100 turns that stop all the reflections but maybe we can trick the secondary to only seeing what I want it to see this way voltages will boost, just got finished up with making them last night, so Im putting the rest of it together tonight. And if that works then we are already set for adding caps cause I set the shorts to stick out of the gap I can just go ahead and untie them and add the caps.
I don't think its been done before so I have to check this avenue weather good or bad.
@hope - I think I do plenty already, you have the construction you have the latest of what im doing, I haven't gotten this far by watching videos, Ive gotten this far by doing the work. And yes there has been at least 3 people beyond myself which have done ou 2 of which you have already commented on, on this forum. So ethier you forgot or well I will just keep my opinion to myself.
NP, good luck. And have not and did not see any results as you mentioned. Only encouraged a person who was unsuccessful at finding COP > 1 using your suggested layout and windings. Sorry you can't show your results to us, we as a group should not have to retread unfruitful work, as we are open source I thought. So why the limited feedback and anger. I am not asking anything but for specifics. Why when anyone mentions Thane's projects do you get up in arms? What is your COP up to tops now? People just need to know what is working and push that envelope. Not shortness for asking for specifics. Making a working model makes other not so working models obsolete, that is all we are needing. Why the guff? Why not instead help these readers and builders make headway?
Do you have a video camera? Can you take time to provide some photos of you recent efforts? Can you show windings info. I know you have said you have tried a lot of things so far, but what is the rig that is working over COP > 1 have? It is a lot of cash buying nano perm cores and we want to be secure in knowing there is a reason for this outlay. I am not the only person wondering this Mav. I get messages from others here as well. I apologize if you are offended by my asking you for the info and realize it costs you $$$ to experiment.
QuoteWhy not place the primary within the center as the milky way does, and then pick up the secondary THRU a surrounding core (doughnut) (iron shell with connected to a nano perm central core)?? Nature knows the way. We want to see what you are saying Mav. To me it does not make a natural layout to go opposite of how nature does it. Please "show us" your working COP > 1 model in that we can replicate it. Salad bowls would even help capture with this design.
QuoteIs there ANYONE out there who has made a single working replication exhibiting COP > 1? If so please post your build specs and results. My life has only so much time I can use in these efforts as many of us do. So please post all that you can to assist us into making Gabriel blow it's horn for the rest of us. Why should anyone of us spend needless monies just getting to your model. Let's maximize our resources and experiment beyond a working model.
Hello everyone, sorry for my long absence in this thread...
Just to remember to you, page 44 of this topic and look the download section for the spec of my version...
I have conserved my working version, now I have some finace I have bought a DSO here: http://cgi.ebay.fr/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=260812640404&ssPageName=STRK:MEWNX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1439.l2649 (http://cgi.ebay.fr/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=260812640404&ssPageName=STRK:MEWNX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1439.l2649)
Come from China... :-\ 4 channels, up to 1 megahertz signal, and many functionality...
The next experience will be trying to understand the phase relation behind the apparatus, because when I remove turns at the primary more current flow to it and secondary become at full brightness but no information about the PF of primary, the objective is to see reflection or not... :D
More to come ;D
Quote from: CLaNZeR on August 26, 2011, 04:47:30 PM
Hi Hope
On the M417 there is approx 2000 winds of 16AWG (approx 1.3mm)
16 awg 4.0156 Kohms per 1000 feet (.00473 per ft) 7.8177 pounds (3.5kg) = 1000ft
I worked out roughly 116mm's per turn
So 116 * 2000 = 232000 mm's
convert to inches
232000 /25.4 = 9133 inches
Convert to feet
9133 /12 = 761 feet
So resistance is .00473 per foot * 761 = 3.6 ohms
So around 3.5 kg of wire.
I ordered 4kg and still got some left over and ended up with 3.5 ohms. So pretty close.
Outer core is 9AWG (approx 3mm)
9AWG we will need about 350 feet, which works out a massive 6kg if my calculations are correct:
9AWG = 39.630 lbs = 1000ft, so 0.03963 lb per foot
1lb = 0.45359237kg
so 350ft * 0.03963 =13.87 lbs
13.87lbs = 6.3 kg
Again I ordered 4kg and plan to wind all of it and see what we end up with.
Did not weigh the nanoperm before winding but I am sure the weight is probably on the spec sheet somewhere.
Cheers
Sean.
Hello Any updates to your work?
How great! Thank you for this update, I have missed this response from Clanzer (I have total respect for this dedicated man). Are there any reports as to results?
So now I will re-order my nano 4 channel, something happened to my last order I guess. Linda can't find it, and Visa says it's not charged. So reorder time. BTY Fry's electronics are selling the "Kill a Watt" wattage meters at around $20 bucks (USAD). Seeed Electronics are selling the DSO 203 at $199 WITH 4 probes (2 r X1) and 2 r X10) (the correct ones for these smartphone sized test units that do a lot of extra's) Goldmine electronics are selling the nano perm sheets if any need um.
Quote from: Hope on August 24, 2011, 02:56:45 AM
Please write this up as far as specs, build instructions and parts list of at least one working model. Include the principles as found. I have done technical writing for a major manufacture of electronics/mechanical equipment and would help if you wish. We can place this document in the downloads area so as to make it easy to get it to members who will build theirs. Thank you.
Is this your wish?
Is this for us all?
Richard
Quote
And have not and did not see any results as you mentioned. Only encouraged a person who was unsuccessful at finding COP > 1 using your suggested layout and windings.
Yup this you hope asking for build specifics, so yes you commented on it. and you also congratulated him.
So would you like to try that again?
Hello All
Please ignore the results I posted before as my oscilloscope was setup wrong, and the trigger levels where different for each channel.
I corrected this issue, and there is no delay in voltage between the primary and secondary.
The power factor for my device is 1.
I have got got weird results on voltages, as you increase primary turns secondary no load voltage goes up.
Primary turns: 200
Secondary turns: 2000
Input voltage: 5V
Output voltage: 50V
Primary turns: 400
Secondary turns: 2000
Input voltage: 2V
Output voltage: 223V
Mav: Is there a particular winding direction we have to wind to get this effect?
Also have you measured the inductance of your primary and secondary coils?
thanks
Matt
Quote from: matthewklinko on October 05, 2011, 10:18:03 PM
Hello All
Please ignore the results I posted before as my oscilloscope was setup wrong, and the trigger levels where different for each channel.
I corrected this issue, and there is no delay in voltage between the primary and secondary.
The power factor for my device is 1.
I have got got weird results on voltages, as you increase primary turns secondary no load voltage goes up.
Primary turns: 200
Secondary turns: 2000
Input voltage: 5V
Output voltage: 50V
Primary turns: 400
Secondary turns: 2000
Input voltage: 2V
Output voltage: 223V
Mav: Is there a particular winding direction we have to wind to get this effect?
Also have you measured the inductance of your primary and secondary coils?
thanks
Matt
Matt
I do everything counterclockwise. your shell must be rather thin for a PF of 1 or really close to the innercore, I can get pf down to .07 without much of a problem so don't know what to tell ya. As well Im useing a variac to control my input now days and a amplifier may not be the input of choice for these experiments.
Hey mav thanks for the input
Can you tell me what your no load primary current is?
Do you still run a series load with the primary to limit curent?
Thanks
Quote from: Mavendex on October 07, 2011, 11:29:54 AM
Matt
I do everything counterclockwise. your shell must be rather thin for a PF of 1 or really close to the innercore, I can get pf down to .07 without much of a problem so don't know what to tell ya. As well Im useing a variac to control my input now days and a amplifier may not be the input of choice for these experiments.
QuoteI do everything counterclockwise. your shell must be rather thin for a PF of 1 or really close to the innercore, I can get pf down to .07 without much of a problem so don't know what to tell ya. As well Im useing a variac to control my input now days and a amplifier may not be the input of choice for these experiments.
You mean, the thinner shield closer the PF to 0 !?
So, an iron sheet would be better...
Mine was about 2 milliters...
Quote from: SchubertReijiMaigo on October 09, 2011, 12:57:08 PM
You mean, the thinner shield closer the PF to 0 !?
So, an iron sheet would be better...
Mine was about 2 milliters...
Thicker = 0 Thinner = 1 as far as I can see
I use a variac as the primary source of input not other load in series, so basicly I can make what ever amperage I wish to be input with no load or load on the secondary.
With a load in series with the primary I was able to get it well under a amp. but that was 3 months ago and alot has been learned since then.
To completely defeat reflections intermediate shorted turn on top of the secondary, if you do this your voltages will be diminished so you will have to increase your secondary turns to overcome this, with a pf of 0 and defeating lenz effect you should be able to get very good outcomes.
Im working on a couple of electronic components to add to the device a ultra cap to add to the shorted turn to add more of a battery effect, and a resistive component to the shell to cheapen the input cost. I go on vacation on Wednesday so this will be my last entry till I return, good luck and god speed.
Mav
Thanks very much for this input !!!
For now I wait for oscillo and play around with my version.
I have made a youtube video of my current version (the same I have presented here 2 months ago)...
I think it's important to start to promote the device, maybe inciting many people to replicate and improve the device...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pg0BzIEQPYY (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pg0BzIEQPYY)
And happy holidays 8), after all this work you have done it's fully merited !!!
Mav, have you tried finer gauge more turns on Primary and then heavy gauge less turns on Secondary? If so what was your findings?
Are M 427 coils worth trying, three of them?
And Goldmine Electronics are selling a couple different variacs for decent prices.
Service Project update: I can't build this week, winter comes and her heat is not in yet. So be back as soon as I remedy it.
The lady is in her 70's so I must help her till I am finished or she made get ill.
Thanks Daniel for your being here.
This invention is an improvement in electrical transformers or converters, and has for its main objects the provision of means for securing, first, a phase difference between the primary and secondary currents adapted to the operation of my alternating-current motors and other like purposes, and, second, a constant current for all loads imposed upon the secondary.
In transformers as constructed now and heretofore it will be found that the electro-motive force of the secondary very nearly coincides with that of the primary, being, however, of opposite sign. At the same time the currents, both primary and secondary, lag behind their respective electro-motive forces; but as this lag is practically or nearly the same in the case of each it follows that the maximum and minimum of the primary and secondary currents will nearly coincide, but differ in sign or direction, provided the secondary be not loaded or if it contain devices having the property of self-induction. On the other hand, the lag of the primary behind the impressed electro-motive force may be diminished by loading the secondary with a non-inductive or dead resistanceâ€"such as incandescent lampsâ€"whereby the time interval between the maximum or the minimum periods of the primary and secondary currents is increased. This time interval, however, is limited, and the results obtained by phase difference in the operation of such devices as my alternating-current motors can only be approximately realized by such means of producing or securing this difference, as above indicated, for it is desirable in such cases that there should exist between the primary and secondary currents, or those which, however produced, pass through the two circuits of the motor, a difference of phase of ninety degrees; or, in other words, the current in one circuit should be maximum when that in the other circuit is minimum. To more perfectly attain to this condition I obtain or secure an increased retardation of the secondary current in the following manner: Instead of bringing the primary and secondary coils or circuits of a transformer into the closest possible relations, as has hitherto been done, I protect in a measure the secondary from the inductive action or effect of the primary by surrounding either the primary or the secondary with a comparatively-thin magnetic shield or screen. Under these conditions or circumstances, as long as the primary current has a small value, the shield protects the secondary; but as soon as the primary current has reached a certain strength, which is arbitrarily determined, the protecting magnetic shield becomes saturated and the inductive action upon the secondary begins. It results, therefore, that the secondary current begins to flow at a certain fraction of a period later than it would without the interposed shield, and since this retardation may be obtained without necessarily retarding the primary current also, an additional lag is secured, and the time interval between the maximum or minimum periods of the primary and secondary currents is increased. I have further discovered that such a transformer may, by properly proportioning its several elements and determining in a manner well understood the proper relations between the primary and secondary windings, the thickness of the magnetic shield, and other conditions, be constructed to yield a constant current at all loads. No precise rules can be given for the specific construction and proportions for securing the best results, as this is a matter determined by experiment and calculation in particular cases; but the general plan of construction which I have described will be found under all conditions to conduce to the attainment of this result.
In the accompanying drawings I have illustrated the construction above set forth.
Figure 1 is a cross-section of a transformer embodying my improvement. Fig. 2 is a similar view of a modified form of transformer, showing diagrammatically the manner of using the same.
A A is the main core of the transformer, composed of a ring of soft annealed and insulated or oxidized iron wire. Upon this core is wound the secondary circuit or coil B B. This latter is then covered with a layer or layers of annealed and insulated iron wires C C, wound in a direction at right angles to said secondary coil. Over the whole is then wound the primary coil or wire D D. From the nature of this construction it will soon be obvious that as long as the shield formed by the wires C is below magnetic saturation the secondary coil or circuit is effectually protected or shielded from the inductive influence of the primary, although I would state that on open circuit it may exhibit some electro-motive force. When the strength of the primary reaches a certain value, the shield C, becoming saturated, ceases to protect the secondary from inductive action, and current is in consequence developed therein. For similar reasons, when the primary current weakens, the weakening of the secondary is retarded to the same or approximately the same extent.
The specific construction of the transformer is largely immaterial. In Fig. 2, for example, the core A is built up of thin insulated iron plates or disks. The primary circuit D is wound next the core A. Over this is applied the shield C, which in this case is made up of thin strips or plates of iron properly insulated and surrounding the primary, forming a closed magnetic circuit. The secondary B is wound over the shield C. In Fig. 2, also, E is a source of alternating or rapidly changing currents. The primary of the transformer is connected with the circuit of the generator.
F is a two-circuit alternating-current motor, one of the circuits being connected with the main circuit from the source E, and the other being supplied with currents from the secondary of the transformer.
Having now described my invention, what I claim isâ€"
1. In an electrical transformer or induction device, the combination, with the main magnetic core and the primary and secondary coils or circuits, of a magnetic shield or screen interposed between said coils, as herein set forth.
2. In an electrical transformer or inductive device, the combination, with the magnetic core and the primary and secondary coils or circuits, of a magnetic shield or screen surrounding one of said coils only, as set forth.
3. In an electrical transformer or induction device, the combination, with the magnetic core and the primary and secondary coils wound thereon, of a magnetic shield or screen wound on or built up around one only of said coils, as described.
4. In an electrical transformer or induction device, the combination, with a main laminated magnetic core and primary and secondary coils thereon, of a subdivided or laminated magnetic shield or screen interposed between the coils, as set forth.
5. In an electrical transformer, the combination, with a magnetic core and primary and secondary coil wound thereon, of a magnetic shield or screen interposed between said coils and surrounding one of them and adapted to be or capable of being magnetically saturated by a predetermined current strength below the maximum in the primary, as set forth.
NIKOLA TESLA
Thought if I put this into the topic formally people would see our goal visually.
Mav have you or anyone you know of tried using a dielectric (like coaxial cable) covered winding wire for the primary the using the secondary feed from the shielding, as the phase shifted bounce back?
This takes me back to the galaxy model in thought again Mav. But at least I am in good company with a man who has done what we dream of doing.
orthogonal field saturation effect ?
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=11350.msg303095#msg303095
"Dreams are the doors to which we create reality"
Quote from: Mavendex on October 20, 2011, 01:56:29 PM
"Dreams are the doors to which we create reality"
Hello Mav, are you back from your holidays?
Is it possible to post a video and more photos of your designs.
I am still having trouble getting my design working.
Quote from: matthewklinko on October 20, 2011, 08:35:43 PM
Hello Mav, are you back from your holidays?
Is it possible to post a video and more photos of your designs.
I am still having trouble getting my design working.
Im back but busy catching up on work, I meet with investors on Monday, after which I do a little show for them and we talk about where we should get started.
Have you added more than 400 turns of primary?
Have you changed your input method?
Have you messed with the secondary?
Have you added shorted turns to your secondary?
If I were having problems those things probably would be where I would get started.
Quote from: Mavendex on October 21, 2011, 09:01:36 AM
Im back but busy catching up on work, I meet with investors on Monday, after which I do a little show for them and we talk about where we should get started.
Have you added more than 400 turns of primary?
Have you changed your input method?
Have you messed with the secondary?
Have you added shorted turns to your secondary?
If I were having problems those things probably would be where I would get started.
Hello mav , that's good to hear .it would be good if you found sometime to take a short video and explain your setups and show them working
It would really help us understand and preceded quicker
I have just tried connecting my setup to 110v ac from the wall.
I have 400 turns on primary and it seems not enough current flies up and saturates the core.
I put a 60w globe in series to limit current and voltage across coil becomes like 5v not enough, and current is always in phase with voltage .
I haven't done any shorted turns as I want to get first stage of power factor zero
And secondary is still the same at 2000 turns
Can you see anything in doing wrong ?
Quote from: matthewklinko on October 21, 2011, 12:06:20 PM
Hello mav , that's good to hear .it would be good if you found sometime to take a short video and explain your setups and show them working
It would really help us understand and preceded quicker
Ya that would be nice, too bad time is of high value and of low availability, I think there is something in the downloads section provided by Schubert with his setup that would probably help you.
I have just tried connecting my setup to 110v ac from the wall.
I have 400 turns on primary and it seems not enough current flies up and saturates the core.
I put a 60w globe in series to limit current and voltage across coil becomes like 5v not enough, and current is always in phase with voltage .
60w globe = not enough juice try using something more robust, with 400 turns that 60 watt globe probably won't draw the .5 amps at which point won't charge your field.
If your going direct from the wall and not getting a reduction in power factor I would think mabye that you should try a different meter 400 turns over 2000 turns should get you at least 30% pf if not more.
I always hook my meter directly to the wall this way I can get the losses calculated from the variac in place plus the voltage from the wall will power the meter vs placing the meter on the variac. My meters will read PF Watts Amps Volts and are very reliable at 120 volts. After I use that just to make sure the measuerments are correct I use a Fluke amp clamp. 99% of the time its dead on acurate.
I am using a variac this helps tremendously.
I haven't done any shorted turns as I want to get first stage of power factor zero
And secondary is still the same at 2000 turns
So you haven't tried a 1 to 1 ratio? Alot of people are in that range and have gotten good success rates.
Can you see anything in doing wrong ?
more experimentation leads to better results :)
Are you saying your turns are a one to one ratio on the Primary and Secondary or the weight of the wire is the same? AND what gauges on each please?
Anyone else having success at 1:1 ratio please post your results for us and a parts list so I may place it in the downloads section.
ALSO there are now at least 8 other people with successful builds on here and energetic forum on the Karpanze device.
The schematics WORK now and a lot of helpful discussion about the SELF RUNNING model is there for the downloading. Congratulations to you all. Wishing Tariel a speedy recovery!
Glad your back safe from your holidays Mav. Good to hear about your planning, hope you get a business lawyer to assist you that you feel is trustworthy. It will keep you from hopefully getting the shaft like Tesla did.
@Mav. Great to hear you have investors wanting to maybe checkout your invention with the hope of turning it into something bigger (for you). Here's wishing you all the best of luck in that regard. Its great to see someone starting with just an inkling of an idea and turning that into something far greater. Hope all goes with your visitors on Monday.
Quote from: Cheap4All on October 22, 2011, 06:37:01 AM
@Mav. Great to hear you have investors wanting to maybe checkout your invention with the hope of turning it into something bigger (for you). Here's wishing you all the best of luck in that regard. Its great to see someone starting with just an inkling of an idea and turning that into something far greater. Hope all goes with your visitors on Monday.
If I can get it my way we will just make a not for profit company this way its good for everyone :)
Thanks things should be good to go I can preform all the effects that I have described with designs on making it smaller and more powerfull with some equipment and proper instruments.
Hello everyone, just a short news about scope:
1) Test was made with the same version described at page 43 of this topic and download section...
2) First observation: the shell is like a phase lock: at no load the PF is 0 with distorted sine wave (shell saturation)...
3) When I put the light bulb the PF goes up to nearly one (but still some power returning to the source).
4) Idem with more load or shortcircuit (in shortcircuit the PF tend to decrease !!!)
5) Voltage are in phase both in primary and secondary !!!
6) Current are in phase both in primary and secondary also !!!
7) Like Tesla said, the shield protect a phase difference between Voltage and current at input side...
8 ) Maybe increasing the shield to the equal surface of the inner core will result a full phase difference of 90° (PF=0 at all load)...
9) Scope shot with the 40 watts bulb secondary load: The green curve is input voltage, the yellow one is current (voltage through a shunt), the red curve is power (Green*Yellow) beware the zero line is at the "M" label at the bottom left of the screen... You will see a very small portion returning to the source...
Quote from: SchubertReijiMaigo on October 23, 2011, 05:09:14 AM
Hello everyone, just a short news about scope:
1) Test was made with the same version described at page 43 of this topic and download section...
2) First observation: the shell is like a phase lock: at no load the PF is 0 with distorted sine wave (shell saturation)...
3) When I put the light bulb the PF goes up to nearly one (but still some power returning to the source).
4) Idem with more load or shortcircuit (in shortcircuit the PF tend to decrease !!!)
5) Voltage are in phase both in primary and secondary !!!
6) Current are in phase both in primary and secondary also !!!
7) Like Tesla said, the shield protect a phase difference between Voltage and current at input side...
8 ) Maybe increasing the shield to the equal surface of the inner core will result a full phase difference of 90° (PF=0 at all load)...
9) Scope shot with the 40 watts bulb secondary load: The green curve is input voltage, the yellow one is current (voltage through a shunt), the red curve is power (Green*Yellow) beware the zero line is at the "M" label at the bottom left of the screen... You will see a very small portion returning to the source...
Thanks for your results they are pretty much the same as what I get
Power factor at no load is zero
I can phase delay the secondary voltage by 90 degrees if you increase frequency to about 2khz on no load.
But as you load Pf goes to almost 1
Shorting does reduce power factor by a small amount as you said
Seems I was in error Mavendex, I must of had a brain fart. Wasn't intentional, just to many irons in the fire here and fatigue takes its toll.
I updated the Gabriel Device in the downloads section.
Acquired a ancient 45 amp / 0 to 135 volts Variac and need some recommends on a frequency generator. Funds are limited just now but I am searching for needed materials for a build. Received a good deal on a couple HV trafcos this week on the mainland.
Quote from: Mavendex on October 21, 2011, 09:01:36 AM
Im back but busy catching up on work, I meet with investors on Monday, after which I do a little show for them and we talk about where we should get started.
Hi, Mav! This is Dr. Steven Jones. While I strongly support your work -- and understand the approach of involving investors, at the same time here is something to think about, from a thread I started over at OUR.com, post by wattsup:
QuoteRegardless of the build grade Level, inventors should realize that weather they go public or try to hold it under their belts for patenting and commercial routes, they should not get overly invested because regardless of the final disclosure method, give it 3-6 months and that first disclosure will be rendered obsolete. So for any OU inventor, the ultimate payback will be eventual obsolescence which is the natural law of exponential progress and if you cannot know this in advance, then you will be investing important monies in your own demise because someone will come after you and their derivative technology will make yours seem like the stone age very quickly.
wattsup
I urge you to think carefully about this... You are welcome to join the discussion, get feedback
here:
http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=1160.msg17868;topicseen#msg17868
Thanks Doc.
Both my friend and I are into this to save the planet not make richs, Teslas construction with the modifications I have listed plus a few electrical components that were not available in Teslas day will make it so we don't have to rely on the fossil fuels any longer.
Thank you for your support, and we will keep things as humble as possible. Although doing research for a living would be a nice turn of events vs. working 40 hours for a job then dropping another 40 into research and development.
Money is nice to be able to make cash from farming energy would be excellent. but all in all I would just like to see oil used for something useful instead of feeding our gas tanks.
Look like some bad news: :-[ according my red (power curve) Current*Voltage...
Look like my version is not OU anymore... But rather an energy destroyer... :o :o
Let's me explain, at the input side PF is nearly 1 and the output is 1, but if you look carefully the two curve look like it need 2.5 time energy :o :o to power a load, ie for one Watt at secondary you need 2.5 Watts (not VA)...
Question at 1 Yen here: What I have missed here !? It's crazy... ???
How to turn in OU state !? (Adding turns, because my turn ratio is under one so for any trun ratio above 1 it switch in OU state !? Crazy)
Or the current at secondary is not measurable by conventional meter (Cold or Radiant current) I think I become mad here...
First Graph is INPUT and second OUPUT:
you changed your turns ratio to what?
It's the same as the download section, 156/117, Yeah it's crazy this the exact same version, input is 12 V 50Hz... I calibrated the scope used the same shunt (a telephone wire) for current measurement, same scales, etc,etc make several measure but not I find this curious result... I think it's due to the turn ratio less than one... If I remember correctly I 'am the one with turn ratio under one...
Hmm I think it's time to ad turns at secondary...
I read that wrong sorry, That is interesting with conventional measuring that it would look like it isn't working but your output is different than what the scope is saying.
How deep does the rabbit hole go...
This is why I think about unconventional current like Radiant-Cold current. Many inventors and "Legend" tell that cold current cannot be measured by conventional meter but those current perform work like any other conventional current. Believe me, I 'am highly disturbed here, because normally nothing can trick an oscilloscope look like a fox prank for me :D !!!
Thinking..... Manufacturing in the future me thinks :-X
Quote from: SchubertReijiMaigo on October 24, 2011, 09:27:49 AM
It's the same as the download section, 156/117, Yeah it's crazy this the exact same version, input is 12 V 50Hz... I calibrated the scope used the same shunt (a telephone wire) for current measurement, same scales, etc,etc make several measure but not I find this curious result... I think it's due to the turn ratio less than one... If I remember correctly I 'am the one with turn ratio under one...
Hmm I think it's time to ad turns at secondary...
Hello SchubertReijiMaigo
I am getting the same results as you, and my scope shots look the same.
A lot more power required to power load then needed. And input PF is a little less then 1
I have 400 turns on my primary and 2000 turns on my secondary so looks like winding ratios dont really matter.
Can I ask what core you are using, and the permeability?
Quote from: SchubertReijiMaigo on October 24, 2011, 12:40:00 PM
This is why I think about unconventional current like Radiant-Cold current. Many inventors and "Legend" tell that cold current cannot be measured by conventional meter but those current perform work like any other conventional current. Believe me, I 'am highly disturbed here, because normally nothing can trick an oscilloscope look like a fox prank for me :D !!!
What do you mean by tricks oscilloscope ?
I have connected my toroid primary in series with a 240V 2000W Kettle.
I applied a voltage of 110V the results for no load are.
Kettle
26.5V 0.85A 22.26W
Toroid
86.8V 0.84A 72.9W
Total Power = 95.16W
Then I load the secondary with a 240V 60W globe:
Kettle
21.7V 0.68A 14.75W
Toroid
91.6V 0.68A 62.29W
Total Power = 77.04W
As you can see the total power dropped when I added a load.
But this is because the kettle is the current limiting device in my circuit.
Hence when I loaded the secondary the voltage across the primary increased, and hence
the voltage drop across the kettle decreased, hence also decreasing the current flowing.
The reduced current results in less power being consumed. (voltage constant)
I think this explains why you see visual results but the oscilloscope shows the truth.
QuoteWhat do you mean by tricks oscilloscope ?
Radiant or cold electricity, is not measurable with conventional meter...
For the result: IS your core is saturated what is your cross section ?
(This can explain the current drop at primary side, to understand this try to saturate a trafo and load it, you will see curious effect but no OU)
Mine is 3.24cm^2 and 30000µ.
Shield is 2 millimiter.
QuoteI have 400 turns on my primary and 2000 turns on my secondary so looks like winding ratios dont really matter.
Hmm, look like bad news here, if I can't switch in OU state by turn ratio, the last parameter is the thickness of the shield to switch PF to 0 at all load...
Quote from: SchubertReijiMaigo on October 25, 2011, 05:05:48 AM
Radiant or cold electricity, is not measurable with conventional meter...
For the result: IS your core is saturated what is your cross section ?
(This can explain the current drop at primary side, to understand this try to saturate a trafo and load it, you will see curious effect but no OU)
Mine is 3.24cm^2 and 30000µ.
Shield is 2 millimiter.
Hmm, look like bad news here, if I can't switch in OU state by turn ratio, the last parameter is the thickness of the shield to switch PF to 0 at all load...
My core is 9cm^2 and it was measured to be 60000u at 20khz
Also interesting result when I doubled the load with two globes the current increased again to over 1A
So there may be something there ...
when you guys did the short circuit how many turns did you use?
and where did you put it?
Hello Hope, I want to check your updated data but dont know where the downloads section is. If you can give me a link please. Thank you.
sergenet, http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=downloads which is available from the home page in the menu bar next to 'logout'.
Quotewhen you guys did the short circuit how many turns did you use?
and where did you put it?
Did you mean when we short secondary ? The result was a slightly PF shift to zero but not much and energy destroyer, like destructing a full of watts and output of 0 watts (short circuit) LOL a negative COP.
According to scope, it's December 2012 Armageddon before time... :o
--> For the first time in this world, I have broken first law of Thermodynamic, I am an energy destroyer,
no maybe a Black Hole ;D ;D ;D <--
Now the good thing will to synthesize some, because the oil Brent skyrocket now...
Thanks, Hope.
Quote from: SchubertReijiMaigo on October 25, 2011, 02:50:33 PM
Did you mean when we short secondary ? The result was a slightly PF shift to zero but not much and energy destroyer, like destructing a full of watts and output of 0 watts (short circuit) LOL a negative COP.
According to scope, it's December 2012 Armageddon before time... :o
--> For the first time in this world, I have broken first law of Thermodynamic, I am an energy destroyer,
no maybe a Black Hole ;D ;D ;D <--
Now the good thing will to synthesize some, because the oil Brent skyrocket now...
Like I said how many and where did you put them, Did you just short the secondary or did you fit a shorted turn to the secondary structure, did you put it on the shell or inside the shell, how many did you use 1 turn 10 turns 50 turns 100 turns?
Mav
Quote from: Mavendex on October 25, 2011, 04:09:33 PM
Like I said how many and where did you put them, Did you just short the secondary or did you fit a shorted turn to the secondary structure, did you put it on the shell or inside the shell, how many did you use 1 turn 10 turns 50 turns 100 turns?
Mav
I think he meant shorting the secondary winding, I get the same results
Quote from: matthewklinko on October 25, 2011, 06:34:39 PM
I think he meant shorting the secondary winding, I get the same results
Don't do that add a shorted turn or several and see what happens :)
Quote from: Mavendex on October 25, 2011, 06:45:19 PM
Don't do that add a shorted turn or several and see what happens :)
Hello Mav
Whats the difference between adding shorted turns, and having the shell as a shorted turn.
Wasn't that a bad thing?
Shorted shell = transformer not inductor
Shorted Turns = Something new and fantastic, that cold current is all I can muster up as a explanation when I do the shorted secondary turns on the secondary structure = 1. PF will not reflect 2. with enough shorted turns Amps will not reflect 3. you can watch the amps drop over time and the transformer will heat up to over 200 degrees at least in the setup I have been testing, yes heat is bad but only if you don't plan for it there are several ways to make the same concept as a superconducting transformer. 4. another side effect is you will see your voltage diminished this is why I say you will need to add more secondary to combat this side-effect.
Instead of nuclear reactions think a Magnetic Reactor still in testing stages and adding my resistive components but I can prove this beyond a shadow of a doubt that it happens.
Mav
Hey Mav
Are you saying that you have wound shorted turns, on top of the sec, and are not electrically associated with the sec? Any leads out of the shell to measure current in the shorted winding?
Like, just some shorted loops, or a complete other winding that is shorted? Same no. of turns and size as sec?
Also, do you think the heat is from the shorted winding, or a combo of it and sec?
If so, then maybe more smaller(less turns) windings with heavy loads. Be interesting to see a big ac induction motor driven with little input. ;]
Good work dude. ;]
This all makes me think of how Tesla got that big ole 80 hp ac induction motor(300 pounds if I remember correctly) to power the Peirce Arrow without batteries.
Maybe he used some of these ideas and he built into the motor. Modified. ;] I wouldnt doubt that Tesla would have taken advantage in all parts of his circuit. ;]
Thanks Mav, for everything. ;]
Mags
Quote from: Magluvin on October 25, 2011, 10:33:59 PM
Hey Mav
Are you saying that you have wound shorted turns, on top of the sec, and are not electrically associated with the sec? Any leads out of the shell to measure current in the shorted winding?
Yes and the one time I did have a loop on the outside to measure the current in the wire, the wire read 7 amps with the input being 10 amps.
Like, just some shorted loops, or a complete other winding that is shorted? Same no. of turns and size as sec?
Not the same number of turns, too many shorted turns yields less and less voltage out. But Think ultracapacitors on the shorted ends that will be interesting
Also, do you think the heat is from the shorted winding, or a combo of it and sec?
Heat is most likely from the shorted turns my tape is rated for 200 degrees and it basically disintegrated while my electrical tape around the secondary was not as badly corrupted
If so, then maybe more smaller(less turns) windings with heavy loads. Be interesting to see a big ac induction motor driven with little input. ;]
Good work dude. ;]
This all makes me think of how Tesla got that big ole 80 hp ac induction motor(300 pounds if I remember correctly) to power the Peirce Arrow without batteries.
Maybe he used some of these ideas and he built into the motor. Modified. ;] I wouldnt doubt that Tesla would have taken advantage in all parts of his circuit. ;]
Thanks Mav, for everything. ;]
Theres more to come when we hit 88 mph your gonna see some serious shit 8)
Mav
Quote from: Mavendex on October 26, 2011, 09:17:13 AM
Hello Mav
7 amps on the shorted turns that's a lot of wasted heat ! I really dont understand how it's any benefit . And when you say it stops reflections do you mean that the input always stays at 10amps and pf of 0, when the secondary is loaded and not loaded .
To help understand , can you give an example where shorted turns has given you the best result.
What was the power in and PF, and power out on no load
And what was the powerin and PF, and power out with load and what type of load
Thanks
Quote from: matthewklinko on October 26, 2011, 03:51:15 PM
Hello Mav
7 amps on the shorted turns that's a lot of wasted heat ! I really dont understand how it's any benefit .
ummm that was one experiment if you read that properly I have done this several times now.
And when you say it stops reflections do you mean that the input always stays at 10amps and pf of 0, when the secondary is loaded and not loaded .
0 reflections
To help understand , can you give an example where shorted turns has given you the best result.
What was the power in and PF, and power out on no load
And what was the powerin and PF, and power out with load and what type of load
Nope nor will I give you my latest construction
Thanks
Your welcome
Quote from: Mavendex on October 26, 2011, 04:36:10 PM
haha ok Mav, well thanks a lot for your help so far.
I have just bought myself a 240V 25A variac so I will continue my testing :)
http://books.google.com/books?id=KRg9HWakBmQC&pg=PA101&lpg=PA101&dq=counsel+tesla+tuned&source=bl&ots=0SiK2DaUJB&sig=oWn4F_JH4e6giceZa46HHTIFhyo&hl=en&ei=juuoTsOjN-uN4gTro_H2Dw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CBoQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=counsel%20tesla%20tuned&f=false
Hello I had a play around with the variac.
I have the same setup 2000 turn secondary , and 400 turn primary
I had to input about 90v peak AC, before the core would saturate.
The more you increase voltage after that point the more current will flow.
I set the current to about 2 A and loaded the secondary and the current goes down. You can keep loading the secondary until the all the excess flux is used up (core stops saturating), after that point current starts to rise.
You can't drive the current down more then you are using, so min current is still magnistising current + load current
I can confirm this with mine...
QuoteYou can't drive the current down more then you are using, so min current is still magnetising current + load current
Yeah , the good: current decrease upon loading, the bad: you can't not extract more if not current rising again, and the ugly: the load current is PF=1 fully reflected to source...
Quote from: Mavendex on October 26, 2011, 04:36:10 PM
Hello Mav
SchubertReijiMaigo and I , have tried building your first build. (Core, Secondary, Shield, and primary)
We both can't get your observed affects, I believe your first build didnt have any shorted turns. Can you give us
any advice we are missing.
I have used a power meter, variac, and oscilloscope , and cant get a power factor of 0, or getting more current out then in.
Unless your using tin-plated twisted pair copper wire for your primary, This rather large shell and the same core your not doing the first build your doing your modification which your having trouble with and want help for which I gave you a fix IE shorted turns.
Quote from: Mavendex on November 01, 2011, 09:41:46 PM
Unless your using tin-plated twisted pair copper wire for your primary, This rather large shell and the same core your not doing the first build your doing your modification which your having trouble with and want help for which I gave you a fix IE shorted turns.
Hello Mav ok i didn't know you used twisted pair tin plated copper wire for the primary, did you use the wire in parallel ?
Also have you tried running a load from your sec shorted turns instead of shorting, or running in parallel with the other secondary? Closer to thanes design, with 2 secondary coils?
I don't know if you find it useful but here are my personal thoughts : if I could test it myself I would first try to find matching capacitor in primary forming parallel LCR circuit, then the same for secondary. You should immediately see the problem with low inductance in primary needing large capacitor, in secondary LCR should be possible easier.Unfortunately I don't have high permeability core (only soft iron segmented one like Tesla) which is the big problem (can't find capacitor for 50Hz to 800Hz resonance (resonable for iron core)) - yet, I have that transformer almost ready for testing .So ,this would be my first step anyway, but unfortunately this device is the last on my list of 4 to 10 to complete before (with tests) . ;D
I never well understood all those pf issues but in simple words , what you need is the magnetic field of shield collapse adding current in phase with primary LCR capacitor exactly at the moment when power source is charging it.Symphatetic resonance.
With proper LCR parallel resonance it should be possible to use AC-DC inverter powering primary at lower amperage then in original case.
@ Forest: good idea to use LCR, but problem unless you use Transverter diode plug 2 PH or 3 PH Motors/Transformers with high Q LCR, the R will be reflected to the source fully... In single phase without arrangement R will be always reflected as R (IE PF=1) and totally... You don't need this special two toroid trafo. For this, a simple single phase (with special extraction circuit) or 2, 3 phases, R is reflected in the leading/lagging phase, in a rotating field, not or less to source (Q factor and tuning dependant).
@ Matt I utilized the reverse charge flow that tesla mentioned to increase magnetic field strength with his bifilar designs, only changed it slightly to fit to this design. (Draw back to twisted pair, tinned wire is really flipping expensive, plus I like the shorted turns it allows a much easier, faster build)
the shorted turn has a whopping 2.3 volts per coming out of it so basically its just doing the job that its intended for.
Quote from: Mavendex on November 02, 2011, 07:54:04 AM
@ Matt I utilized the reverse charge flow that tesla mentioned to increase magnetic field strength with his bifilar designs, only changed it slightly to fit to this design. (Draw back to twisted pair, tinned wire is really flipping expensive, plus I like the shorted turns it allows a much easier, faster build)
the shorted turn has a whopping 2.3 volts per coming out of it so basically its just doing the job that its intended for.
Hello Mav
Are you saying that your secondary voltage and also the voltage across your shorted turns doesn't vary with primary voltage. You said you get a 0.11 V per turn on secondary, and a 2.3V per turn on your shorted turns (15 turns?).
So does that mean as you vary the primary voltage through the variac the secondary voltage doesn't change, as it only depends on the number of turns?
Also do you believe the reason I'm not getting a phase shift is because I'm using a mild steel donut shell, and not a cold rolled steel shell.
Have you had experience with mild steel?
Hello I did some tests, and rewound my secondary and placed two loops of 15 shorted turns on top.
Then i wound a 200 turn primary.
I did the following tests I input 2A into the primary the core saturates then I loaded the secondary with a 60W globe, current drops a little bit, core is still saturated, current will drop to the point the core is no longer saturated then will rise again.
I then increased the input current will loaded to show it saturates more.
PF increases as you load the secondary.
Shorted turns only increase the current and don't stop reflections.
The results I'm getting don't show anything out of the normal or overunity.
see below for photos
photos 1
photos 2
Awesome work Mat! ;]
Now thats a Show. Even if no ou. ;
The scope shots, are they V A of sec? Or in and out?
Is the input just sine? I see the wave steps. This is what I imagined. When the primary saturates the shell, then breaks through to the sec.
Thanks for sharing and showing. Good man. ;]
Mags
Quote from: Magluvin on November 09, 2011, 08:59:00 PM
Awesome work Mat! ;]
Now thats a Show. Even if no ou. ;
The scope shots, are they V A of sec? Or in and out?
Is the input just sine? I see the wave steps. This is what I imagined. When the primary saturates the shell, then breaks through to the sec.
Thanks for sharing and showing. Good man. ;]
Mags
Thanks Mags
The scope shots are Volts(red) and Amps(yellow) both are input, and the input is just a sine wave through a variac.
The current is read from a current transformer through a resistor.
Quote from: Magluvin on November 09, 2011, 08:59:00 PM
This is what I imagined. When the primary saturates the shell, then breaks through to the sec.
I was thinking that it would be the secondary core that's saturating, and the shell doesn't seem to have any effect...
In Teslas pat, he talks about getting the primary to break through or penetrate the shell, or shield, that is around the secondary.
I would see this as what you have shown. As the primary voltage rises from 0 volts, there will be a point in the rise that the shell is saturated and then penetration.
Ill think of some things you can try after I reread the pat, maybe it will help. Ill see what I can do. ;]
Have you tried other freq of input?
Mags
I dont know if you read it, but here is the pat. Have to get to sleep. Will be back tomorrow. ;]
Mags
Quote from: Magluvin on November 10, 2011, 12:22:29 AM
I dont know if you read it, but here is the pat. Have to get to sleep. Will be back tomorrow. ;]
Mags
Hello Mags, I've read that patent many times, its very interesting.
Though I do think that's its still the inner core that's saturating. because if I drive the current down to a point where its not saturating and load the core , the bulb will light up, and the output will be a clean sine wave.
then if i further increase the current the bulb will get brighter till the core saturates and from then on the bulb stays the same brightness and the sine wave output it distorted like in the photos.
If the shield was actually shielding the secondary current wouldn't flow in the secondary until the shield saturated.
So either my shield isn't working, or its saturating too soon that I don't notice.
My shield is a 3" mild steel donut.
I'm trying to get my hands on a 3" CRGO donut at this time to see if it makes a difference.
http://www.free-energy-info.com/Combine.pdf
lots of good stuff in here
Making cores
Have you made your own cores with epoxy or resin mixed with 1 or more of these.
I have not yet, any other mixes that mite be a good to try.
-iron filings
-iron powder
-iron oxide
-xerox developer powder
-black sand
Has anyone been able to replicate the device yet?
Any positive results you can share?
Matt
The "SmartScareCrow" show today on Justin TV had a guest interview of someone who has developed a product somewhat similar to the Gabriel Device, but using old TV CRT Tube yokes as well as ferrite rings.
I'm posting this info as I felt the show and the guest site info might be useful for ideas in our development.
This is the web site given on the show as supplied by the guest:
http://freeenergylt.narod2.ru/aidas
Its possible that you may not be able to access this site due to your country not allowing access to Russian sites. During the justin.tv show, a lot of viewers from the USA in the forum said they couldn't link to it. This site contains videos, circuit diagrams and pictures.
The guests own YouTube site is:
http://www.youtube.com/user/stivep1
SmartScareCrow posts his weekly show to YouTube.
The show you are looking for is dated: 20111117
This is the YouTube location:
http://www.youtube.com/user/SmartScarecrow
13th Nov. 2011: Overunity Transformer from Alexander Kugushov (http://www.overunity.com/../../../../../../11688/new-overunity-transformer-from-alexander-kugushov/)
There is another type of transformer that does the same thing, Also I was looking into regenerative inverters as well as KVAR which will switch the phase angle back to 1, this will allow us to close the loop on input since most to all of the power used is reactive and will return to the source.
Mistubishi has a regenerative inverter that handles the overvoltge which will be important, a passive network of capacitors on the input line will recapture the energy and dump it back in to the device.
So instead of useing 15 amps it drops too, 1 or less being consumed or even 0 if done correctly.
Mav
Very similar to Rotoverter and Transverter stuff finally: A trafo, a cap, resonance, high Q amplification, playing with power factors and result OU...
I wonder why Mitsubishi don't comercialize that since Fukushima accident, 80% of the Japanese want to f*ck up nuke industies...
Parallel RLC on primary and the same on secondary NOT the same frequency. Sympathetic resonance ;D I would try this but my core is iron wires based and low permeability - hard to find so big capacitors rated at 300-400V
@Forest. You might be able to find what you want in old air-conditioning units, but only those ones that have inverters in them. Also I don't know what country you live in, so it depends on your voltage. Those in 120v countries might not have capacitors rated as high as those in 240v countries.
Why not trying a parallel LC at primary and load secondary as is... Parallel LC must be high Q (capacitor small relatively to L even in loaded state), and use a VFD to drive the frequency: more load more frequency to keep Q high and resonance when load vary...
I have old trafos one 15 uF caps but not VFD or modified sine inverter, Hector said that network sine or modified sine (square wave) are the best to drive in RV mode...
Quote from: Cheap4All on November 17, 2011, 11:59:25 PM
The "SmartScareCrow" show today on Justin TV had a guest interview of someone who has developed a product somewhat similar to the Gabriel Device, but using old TV CRT Tube yokes as well as ferrite rings.
I'm posting this info as I felt the show and the guest site info might be useful for ideas in our development.
This is the web site given on the show as supplied by the guest:
http://freeenergylt.narod2.ru/aidas (http://freeenergylt.narod2.ru/aidas)
Its possible that you may not be able to access this site due to your country not allowing access to Russian sites. During the justin.tv show, a lot of viewers from the USA in the forum said they couldn't link to it. This site contains videos, circuit diagrams and pictures.
The guests own YouTube site is:
http://www.youtube.com/user/stivep1 (http://www.youtube.com/user/stivep1)
SmartScareCrow posts his weekly show to YouTube.
The show you are looking for is dated: 20111117
This is the YouTube location:
http://www.youtube.com/user/SmartScarecrow (http://www.youtube.com/user/SmartScarecrow)
Those guys are our own...stevep, T-1000, Tiger and others, sorry I can't remember their names.
The device is named STAAR, an acronym for their screen names.
start reading around page 520 something to catch up
http://www.overunity.com/7679/selfrunning-free-energy-devices-up-to-5-kw-from-tariel-kapanadze/new/topicseen/
Hello guys I believe what Mav has built is a asymmetrical transformer.
Information can be found in this document.
http://www.free-energy-info.com/VladimirUtkin.pdf
It states that you can get better output if you have a parallel resonant cap on the input. And have a shunt cap on the shorted turns.
what do you think?
Hello Mav
Can you give us an update to where you are at?
Hows your design going?
Found any good investors?
Closed the loop?
I had one question with my design , have you tired mild steel as a shell? or will it only work with CRGO?
Did you end up with the permalloy or mumetal shell?
thanks
matt
Quote from: Cheap4All on November 19, 2011, 04:38:17 PM
@Forest. You might be able to find what you want in old air-conditioning units, but only those ones that have inverters in them. Also I don't know what country you live in, so it depends on your voltage. Those in 120v countries might not have capacitors rated as high as those in 240v countries.
you can use a modified air cap (old tuner type) for HV just take out plates to make the gap wider AANNNDDD you can also use an old CRT (picture tube) as a HV capacitor that will hold lots of zap. Suggest you keep it mounted in the old chassis for safety.
air variable capacitor from scrap aluminum sheets (http://www.instructables.com/id/air-variable-capacitor-from-scrap-aluminum-sheets/) you can build variable air caps but modify the design to leave big gaps for HV use.
Bessemer Steel will give you a great material for transformer action Tesla used AU wire for voltage increase and copper wire for current increases.
Babit metal may also be a great choice if you can still find it.
Been thinking about the shorted turns.
In a normal transformer, as the secondary is loaded, the primary inductance goes down, as the load is increased. So the primary is able to conduct more current due to lower impedance as the secondary is loaded.
So, if we have it that the primary is not affected by the secondary(shell game), and, we can only seem to get out nearly what the the primary uses, then, when we add shorted secondaries, it would act kind of like a tertiary to the secondary. And the tertiary, shorted current flow, might allow the secondary to output more current like the primary in a normal transformer, and maybe more output than without the tertiary. Maybe ;] Always thinkin
Mags
Matt, you seem to have nice scope. Could you put probes on the shell ? Lets see what kind of eddy currents there are. Note, no idea if this is safe from scope point of view. If there is no difference between shell halves then maybe both shell halves are + signed on one cycle and - signed on other cycle. What happens if you take one half and connect it to ground, is there current ?
As for shorted turns, if you put cap there then perhaps oscillation frequency differs from the mains and you would get amplitude modulated primary which then reflects in secondary. Would be interesting to see scope shots with shorted turns using capacitor.
Also cap between shell halves might have some effect, or connecting secondary to shell halves, cap between shells and output from the shell. Lets do some sharp shooting in the dark !
Quote from: Magluvin on December 02, 2011, 01:00:38 PM
Been thinking about the shorted turns.
In a normal transformer, as the secondary is loaded, the primary inductance goes down, as the load is increased. So the primary is able to conduct more current due to lower impedance as the secondary is loaded.
So, if we have it that the primary is not affected by the secondary(shell game), and, we can only seem to get out nearly what the the primary uses, then, when we add shorted secondaries, it would act kind of like a tertiary to the secondary. And the tertiary, shorted current flow, might allow the secondary to output more current like the primary in a normal transformer, and maybe more output than without the tertiary. Maybe ;] Always thinkin
Mags
Mag, I would suggest a 25-40 watt bulb in line with the secondary limiting its current for protection of the secondary. Most FB's have a small current carrying ability some where between 20-50 watts.
Found a unlimited source of permalloy for virtually free.... Harddrives the brackets are permalloy, people usually just toss those or let you take the whole machine for nothing which is a good source for materials, I have about 10lbs of the stuff now :)
Quote from: Mavendex on January 05, 2012, 12:18:17 PM
Found a unlimited source of permalloy for virtually free.... Harddrives the brackets are permalloy, people usually just toss those or let you take the whole machine for nothing which is a good source for materials, I have about 10lbs of the stuff now :)
wow good find Mav! and you get some powerful magnets aswell.
How do you plan on warping the brackets around the the toroid? Make like a box?
Quote from: matthewklinko on January 05, 2012, 03:31:15 PM
wow good find Mav! and you get some powerful magnets aswell.
How do you plan on warping the brackets around the the toroid? Make like a box?
melt them down in a kiln and then cast them in a toroid is the plan although I don't think they are necessary just a project I would like to try
Quote from: Mavendex on January 05, 2012, 06:38:09 PMmelt them down in a kiln and then cast them in a toroid...
Sorry to kill your idea Mav, but its not that simple with Permalloy ???. Making permalloy involves a very special process to achieve the Permalloy effect. Just melting them down and casting would absolutely ruin them, no longer would they be permalloy, nor would you be able to use them for anything magnetic. Probably only good as paperweights.
Better idea would be to cut them and maybe have a slightly rectangular toroid, or to angle cut them so as to form a circle and bind the cut angular bits together somehow.
Quote from: Mavendex on January 05, 2012, 06:38:09 PM
melt them down in a kiln and then cast them in a toroid is the plan although I don't think they are necessary just a project I would like to try
Ok sounds good, any chance of getting a update how you are going with your project? investors?
I havent had much time lately to work on my replication but I hope to start back up again in a week or so.
goodluck with it all
Quote from: Cheap4All on January 05, 2012, 08:51:46 PM
Sorry to kill your idea Mav, but its not that simple with Permalloy ??? . Making permalloy involves a very special process to achieve the Permalloy effect. Just melting them down and casting would absolutely ruin them, no longer would they be permalloy, nor would you be able to use them for anything magnetic. Probably only good as paperweights.
Better idea would be to cut them and maybe have a slightly rectangular toroid, or to angle cut them so as to form a circle and bind the cut angular bits together somehow.
Permalloy is a nickel (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nickel)-iron (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron) magnetic alloy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alloy), with about 20% iron and 80% nickel content. It is notable for its very high magnetic permeability (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_permeability), which makes it useful as a magnetic core (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_core) material in electrical and electronic equipment, and also in magnetic shielding (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_shielding) to block magnetic fields (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_field). Commercial permalloy alloys typically have relative permeability (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permeability_%28electromagnetism%29#Relative_permeability) of around 100,000, compared to several thousand for ordinary steel.
[1]In addition to high permeability, its other magnetic properties are low coercivity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coercivity), near zero magnetostriction (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetostriction), and significant anisotropic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anisotropic) magnetoresistance (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetoresistance). The low magnetostriction is critical for industrial applications, allowing it to be used in thin films where variable stresses would otherwise cause a ruinously large variation in magnetic properties. Permalloy's electrical resistivity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resistivity) generally varies within the range of 5% depending on the strength and the direction of an applied magnetic field (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_field). Permalloys typically have the face centered cubic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Face_centered_cubic) crystal structure with a lattice constant of approximately 0.355 nm in the vicinity of a nickel concentration of 80%. Permalloy is used in transformer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transformer) laminations (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_core) and magnetic recording heads (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recording_head).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permalloy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permalloy)
so ya you can melt it down and cast it, its just a alloy of Iron and nickel if I want to align the domains I have magnets I can run around it while its cooling its not that difficult.
And If I wanted to get real crazy with it we can dope it with liquid nitrogen and crystallize it
Quote from: matthewklinko on January 05, 2012, 08:54:42 PM
Ok sounds good, any chance of getting a update how you are going with your project? investors?
I havent had much time lately to work on my replication but I hope to start back up again in a week or so.
goodluck with it all
Working on the Powerfactor 1 side of things I was told having pf 0 was impractical by a couple of engineers so I had to go back to the drawing board, Tapping in to the GMC Gigantic Magneto Capacitance to increase the potential/voltage of the device to exceed 100% with a powerfactor of 1, the design had to change a little but im still using a innercore and outershell just wrapping it a bit diffrent to get the PF 1, So far so good first time out I was able to achieve 75%, then I redid a couple of things and got to 99.7%, redoing my innercore to exceed 300 volts from 70 should give me the added boost im looking for and create more of a capacitance with my shell should have the transplant done over the weekend.
The Permalloy core Im going to attempt to make should get us well above this current transplant cause the magnetic saturation point of permalloy is around 2 teslas, vs nanoperm which is 1.2, although after saturation of the nanoperm I can get it to almost 1.8 got a nice little magnetic meter that lets me know how strong the field is, so if thats the case then I can drive the permalloy to around 2.5 or so teslas which will increase my voltage and possibly current not really worried about the current tho.
So im just movin along like donkey kong watching the last bits of football and bitch'n cause nebraska can't pull thier heads out of thier butts to make a decent bowl game. freakin huskers....
Mav
oh and here is the GMC info basicly is what we already have this is why when you dose the device with 1 or 2 volts the voltage goes sky high, by modifying the shell a little and having a extremly high voltage on your innercore which translates to the shell, so then you just wrap up the rest of the transformer with a secondary and a primary and walla, the really cool thing about it is that she is Super Silent the variac makes more noise than the actual transformer, and she runs at room temp virtually no heating.
http://www.greentrade.org.tw/backend/lession/doc/77/201188648.pdf
Quote from: Mavendex on January 06, 2012, 12:31:47 PM
Working on the Powerfactor 1 side of things I was told having pf 0 was impractical by a couple of engineers so I had to go back to the drawing board, Tapping in to the GMC Gigantic Magneto Capacitance to increase the potential/voltage of the device to exceed 100% with a powerfactor of 1, the design had to change a little but im still using a innercore and outershell just wrapping it a bit diffrent to get the PF 1, So far so good first time out I was able to achieve 75%, then I redid a couple of things and got to 99.7%, redoing my innercore to exceed 300 volts from 70 should give me the added boost im looking for and create more of a capacitance with my shell should have the transplant done over the weekend.
The Permalloy core Im going to attempt to make should get us well above this current transplant cause the magnetic saturation point of permalloy is around 2 teslas, vs nanoperm which is 1.2, although after saturation of the nanoperm I can get it to almost 1.8 got a nice little magnetic meter that lets me know how strong the field is, so if thats the case then I can drive the permalloy to around 2.5 or so teslas which will increase my voltage and possibly current not really worried about the current tho.
So im just movin along like donkey kong watching the last bits of football and bitch'n cause nebraska can't pull thier heads out of thier butts to make a decent bowl game. freakin huskers....
Mav
oh and here is the GMC info basicly is what we already have this is why when you dose the device with 1 or 2 volts the voltage goes sky high, by modifying the shell a little and having a extremly high voltage on your innercore which translates to the shell, so then you just wrap up the rest of the transformer with a secondary and a primary and walla, the really cool thing about it is that she is Super Silent the variac makes more noise than the actual transformer, and she runs at room temp virtually no heating.
http://www.greentrade.org.tw/backend/lession/doc/77/201188648.pdf (http://www.greentrade.org.tw/backend/lession/doc/77/201188648.pdf)
Thanks for the update Mav, that all sounds very interesting.
It seems that a Magnetic Capacitor could be a next type of battery, if its all true.
Yea a power-factor of 0 isn't that useful it still has the same amount of current in the cables, though you could get free electricity to your house if your service provider doesn't charge you for reactive power?
What I don't understand is the percentage values you are giving are they input power to output power? or voltage?
Does that mean your current device with power factor 1, still giving you the overunity effect?
I'm guessing that if you are running at room temperature that means no more shorted turns.
So if I understand your current design correctly, the shell is your magnetic conductor (two halves) , the air inside is the dielectric, and the primary supplies the external magnetic field. This makes the magnetic capacitor, then if you apply a high voltage to the two halves?
And the secondary core/coil, taps this energy?
Matt
Mav
Was thinking. If you used a cap to make the primary an LC, and find the resonant freq, and tune the input to that, your input should be lowered considerably. And if the transformer works the way I think, the secondary shouldnt spoil the primary resonance.
Worth a try. ;]
Mags
Quote from: Mavendex on January 06, 2012, 11:27:09 AM
so ya you can melt it down and cast it, its just a alloy of Iron and nickel
I hope it can be done as you state. If it works its certainly a good way of getting some permalloy quickly and easily. Look forward to seeing what results you get after your first casting 8)
and the transplant worked ! more to come!
With the shells connected was able to get it to go over by .31 watts at low power! Power Factor 1 easy peasy, now to disconnect the shells and see what happens :)
Quote from: Magluvin on January 06, 2012, 10:27:56 PM
Mav
Was thinking. If you used a cap to make the primary an LC, and find the resonant freq, and tune the input to that, your input should be lowered considerably. And if the transformer works the way I think, the secondary shouldnt spoil the primary resonance.
Worth a try. ;]
Mags
Hey Mags while I wait on Epoxy to dry, what is a LC?
Quote from: Mavendex on January 16, 2012, 05:33:32 PM
Hey Mags while I wait on Epoxy to dry, what is a LC?
He's referring to an L (Inductance in Henry's) C (Capacitance in Farads) resonant tank circuit. You can adjust the resonant frequency of an LC tank circuit by adjusting either the L or C values of the inductor and capacitor.
Good to know :)
1 to 1 on the seperated shell halves and of this try for GMC and the shell halves did show 64 volts with 35 volts input which is pretty nice, so then I tried to pull power off and killed the GMC by breaking down the dielectric bleh re-epoxy Ill keep winding on primary to see where we end up
Mav
Quote from: Mavendex on January 16, 2012, 05:33:32 PM
Hey Mags while I wait on Epoxy to dry, what is a LC?
Thanks Void. ;]
Like ringing a bell. If we try to capture the ring as energy the ring dies in conventional ways of retrieving the energy. But, if your sec doesnt affect the primay, then you can make good use of resonance by adding capacitance to the primary.
If you are trying for 60hz input, then a value of capacitance used with the primary inductance can be found to get it to resonate at or near 60hz. For my tests so far, it seems that if we want the LC to ring at 60hz, detuning input a hair below gives best results, like 59hz to 59.5. At higher freq, as close as possible seems to be best.
Like a pendulum, set up to cycle at a particular freq, it doesnt take much input at the same freq to keep it going.
I believe there are 2 ways to go about it. Either precharge a cap then connect to primary periodically, or an ac input connected to the primary and cap in series.
Once your input is close to the resonant freq of the LC, you should see a good decrease in input power. And hopefully put this thing on the books. ;]
Ron paul 2012 Debate tonight 9pm ;]
Mags
I cut open an old ign coil from the 60s to see core materials and coils.
For the size of the can, there isnt that much in there. More oil than anything.
But one thing that I found interesting, was 2 half round sleeves against the inner walls of the can, with an thin insulating tube to isolate the coils from the can.
But the 2 sleeves are arranged so that the 2 halves have a gap(bout 1/8 in) at the edges to not touch eachother, sure to avoid eddy currents, just like the shells being isolated.
These sleeves are thin and bent amateurishly with kinks and flat spots as if done with a hammer on a 2 by 2 wood block. not sure of the material makeup.
What is interesting is, we can assume that the 2 halves, are 2 halves, to avoid eddy losses. But what about the can? Are these thin sleeves(2 thick on each side) enough to contain the working fields from getting to the can, where eddy losses will surely be because the can is continuous.
The core is thin laminated iron, I think. :o Who knows.
So effectively the sleeves complete the outer core of the transformer in the can.
So this shows that the Gabriel device can be made using straight cores and tube shells split down the middle as I had envisioned earlier to make the builds easier.
I was not happy with home made cores with epoxy. The density is no where near what can be had from a manufacturer.
Ill post some pics of the core materials and sleeves(shells)tomorrow.
Mags
Your right, that it can be done with lower perm cores but not too low I tried using a iron powder core and it didn't get anywhere near the nanoperm, perm of the iron core was 68, but I have a 8000 perm nanocore that did just fine, I would think that silicon steel having a perm of around 2000 would do better considering it can also achieve a High Tesla rating in to the 2 tesla range further increaseing your reactance, and cheaper too boot where a nanocore costs 200+ a silicon steel core would probably be 50 bucks plus you can probably peice one together out of old transformers that they just take to the bone yard.
instead of air use a dielectric that is also magnetic , I personally use JB Kwik on this and so far so good on that, this keeps the magnetic connection electrically isolates the shells and the shells themself develop a very high voltage, do not try to take energy off the shells directly cause it will cause a breakdown of the dielectric and you will have to re jb kwick which is A. messy, B. Stinky, C. a royal pain in the arse. Plus when you seal in your gaps with the JB kwick you seal off any air flow creating a pseudo vacume which is also a very good dilectric. the combination of both makes for good outcomes.
and for a added bonus you can get a nanopowder of strontium titanate and dope the epoxy with that which will further increase the dielectric constant.
By having a high voltage in the shells this will inturn hold up your secondary voltage so your not trading volts for amps. so far I have enough data to prove this fact.
Mav
So after I posted last I had a apiphany or how ever you spell it, I had a test a few days ago where I was getting some really funky results IE when I put my volt meter leads on my nanoperm leads I only had 1 volt lead to 1 lead of the nanoperm and was getting voltage out of the air from the other lead.... now I know it sounds crazy but I also have a hole on the bottom of my shell and hole on the top of my shell which would create a partial vacuum at the center of the shell.
Described here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venturi_effect (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venturi_effect)
Now im gonna give that test another go here over the weekend after I replace my JB weld and put a couple of straws in the holes and see if I can get the same results evidently in we can pull electromagnetic energy from the vacuum which is new to me but Im also only a 2 year student of the phenomenon and I have no back ground in EE but getting better
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuum_energy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuum_energy)
So thats our source or added bonus of energy cause of the change in pressure thats what we get.
Mav
I did a quick test to confirm the theory and yes it is infact the case, a very easy way to go from 0 to 1 power factor, going thru with a battery of tests to see if we can increase output with a little formula of dielectric and some secret sauce plus vacuum.
all is good and well on our way if it all works out after this build we should have a very cheap to build device.
This will be a nice 2.0 build major changes in play and much more simplified
Team America Eff Ya!!
Mav
Still following along... Sounds like an interesting find Mav. Best of luck on this.
Well the cheap version has some drawbacks but those can be sorted out, I still plan on open sourcing the tech cause we all really need it no worries there, money comes and goes but time is forever and the ultimate currency :D Plus I have a lot of other ideas and inventions I can make money on but you can't make money if we are in constant state of war and poverty is the way I look at it.
The 1.2 version is nearly complete vacuum installed all new dielectrics which is nearly dry, I can almost start winding here in a hour.
I think its a good time for a summery of what I have learned over the past year, keep in mind I just picked this stuff up and gave it the good ol American try. (why not seems NASA wasn't gonna do Sh*t about it)
In the original version we had twisted pair which was loaded down by a toaster/ballast which brought the machine in to resonance a real ballast would have done better but that's what I had and really I didn't know any better its just how I always loaded my Rodin coils.
the shells were spot welded on 4 sides and I filled the outergap with JB weld epoxy, the inner gap was well spread out but as you wind windings that would have restricted the air flow.
the inner core was wound with a single crystal copper wire which filled the cavity.
The new shell presented problems and since I only knew from what I did with Rodin coils it was a very exhausting challenge to say the least but we made it and found out a bunch of cool stuff along the way.
with the new shell I tried probably 150 different variations to achieve what we got before, learning every time from mistakes and setbacks, the help I did get was murdered by impossible/complex math. So thanks for nothing on that one although some gems of knowledge did come out of it like "You can't break Physics, but its OK to make more than you put in if you have a source" (((Vacuum/Vortex)))BING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1
She did evolve we went from twisted pair to two conductors a secondary wound on top of the shell and a primary wound on top of that to reinforce the field, (although I may return to the twisted pair eventually)
The shell is electrically isolated completely with two separate dielectrics, JB kwik on the outside to keep the magnetic connection and JB water weld to seal that air in (plus I read JB water weld has a dielectric constant of 100 or so) without these the voltage in the shell will be like 1 or 2 volts instead of 70+ .
Two holes are drilled in the shell one on top and one on bottom the nanoperm wires come out of there, I blow in the holes to make sure air is coming out where air should be coming out and no other place,
The nanoperm is also just wrapped as tight as one could make it and again I think that guy can be replaced with a silicon steel toroid to achieve maximum Teslas.
I found out that the nanoperm does a few things 1. if its not in there the shells voltage will not develop, 2. your secondary voltage will be halved (meaning it increases your reactance greatly), and 3. if you use large wire you will consume more on input. Smaller wire and more windings will give a good result of high voltage out. IE instead of going for 120volts and 10 amps with 10 awg go for 500volts and a few amps or 10000 volts and a Amp. Plus the higher the voltage on the nanoperm the higher the voltage will develop in your secondary so you can use less windings and larger wire to get good results. Over 100% at pf 1
The holes are very good I have had 3 tests so far that make the conclusion that it does infact work that way, arranging the holes for the best vacuum/vortex is a good idea so right under each other doesn't probably work as well as opposite sides. When the machine is powered up you have to give it a minute or so before the vortex establishes itself and then you will hear a change in the machine (literally) she will go from sounding like a inductor/transformer to nearly soundless, the heating will drop and your powerfactor will rise up and everything is honkey dory.
The shell will develop a very high voltage so if its exposed don't freakin touch it, you will want that shell to be exposed to the wire so don't put anything in between the shell and the wire.
and I think that is all I have for now probably have her finished tonight with some good results to be placed out by tomorrow or Monday.
P.S. for all those smart guys that figured all this out already, and decided not to share here is my middle finger letting you know your #1. Cause I know your out there watching!
To all those whom have been supportive and actually tried plus put in good input I salute you if there were more people like you in the world we wouldn't be in this dog race, but instead sipping margaritas while slinging thru space.
And last but not least to those whom tried to sabotage the project cause you did know, and felt superior that you can take things from people and not get in trouble (which your dead wrong about), feel free to walk you self off a cliff the world would be better without egocentric dicks, with a hard on for cash. I'm not stupid and your number will hit my desk eventually.
Mav
@Mav. Wowee.....you sure are getting some things off your chest here in one go! Now you've got me worried which category I fit into, hopefully, cross fingers, a good one ? I'm scared to ask actually.
Call me dumb, but I'm puzzled. Now the way I understand it was your project was to plug into a 120v outlet, use 120v in and as near 0 watts at the kwh power meter as possible, BUT turn this into 120v out and as many watts as possible to use (like say running a fan heater). Now have I got that right ?
But what is confusing me is now you are talking about achieving 10,000 volts and a few amps output. Now my question is how the hell can you use that to do anything ? I am really puzzled!
In my case I use 240v. I have followed what you have been doing in order to achieve the same goal but using a different voltage. I was quite prepared for you to make your invention a commercial product. That I didn't mind whatsoever, because the way I see it is why shouldn't you benefit from something you invented, that's your entitlement quite rightly. And I was quite happy to wait for something to come out that I could buy from you, provided it ran on 240v, that being my only somewhat vital necessity.
So could you help me out by telling me how 10,000v suddenly can become 120v or maybe 240v ?
Quote from: Cheap4All on January 22, 2012, 12:24:52 AM
@Mav. Wowee.....you sure are getting some things off your chest here in one go! Now you've got me worried which category I fit into, hopefully, cross fingers, a good one ? I'm scared to ask actually.
Call me dumb, but I'm puzzled. Now the way I understand it was your project was to plug into a 120v outlet, use 120v in and as near 0 watts at the kwh power meter as possible, BUT turn this into 120v out and as many watts as possible to use (like say running a fan heater). Now have I got that right ?
But what is confusing me is now you are talking about achieving 10,000 volts and a few amps output. Now my question is how the hell can you use that to do anything ? I am really puzzled!
In my case I use 240v. I have followed what you have been doing in order to achieve the same goal but using a different voltage. I was quite prepared for you to make your invention a commercial product. That I didn't mind whatsoever, because the way I see it is why shouldn't you benefit from something you invented, that's your entitlement quite rightly. And I was quite happy to wait for something to come out that I could buy from you, provided it ran on 240v, that being my only somewhat vital necessity.
So could you help me out by telling me how 10,000v suddenly can become 120v or maybe 240v ?
With this vortex/vacuum you can support the inner voltage quite readily at what ever it ends up being you still have to wind a ton of winds tho to get it work out on some itty bitty wire and just pull .5 amps or a amp dependent on the wire you are useing. So I can tell you in my own words but its probably not logical or scientific, so I would rather show you. I have to work in the morning but afternoon I should be finished as long as I don't do something stupid like try and pull energy off the shell or over amp the device to kill the dielectric everything works out pretty smooth. I have monday off and Ill run a video as long as I don't blow myself up or electrocute myself, gotta remember to not ever turn off the secondary before the primary. I had a instance with low voltage that blew my meter and my surge protector cause of the field collapse by turning off the secondary before the primary.
and no your not in the bad category, those who are have already got a peice of my mind I'm just letting them know I don't put up with the crap that they keep trying to shovel on top of me. Plus I'm patient and time will always be on my side for some good ol fasioned got ya back.
cause thems the rules do unto others as you would like them to do unto you, I know its like kicking dirt on the ump but don't hate the player, hate the game.
10000 volts a couple of amps can be transformed back down to what ever you set your voltage for like your 250, if we can achieve 10000 volts and Im sure we can I haven't tried that yet nor am I brave enough at this point in time, but Im sure it can be done as long as you have enough turns.
That can be ethier sent to the grid or just back in to another transformer to get the necessary amps and volts for your house. not super cheap not too easy but ill take it.
Mav
I'm not going to pretend I understand what you're saying or talking about with the vortex/vacuum energy but I sure as heck will be looking forward to that video demonstration, keep up the good work.
I have been thinking would it be possible to use gabby as a resonant transformer. Problem with resonance is that point of resonance changes with load so you need to always tune it to output, or make the output part so that it does not affect input. I recently read article about harmonic resonance in trafos. It was said to avoid it at all cost, why ? Because at harmonic resonance total capacitance and inductance of the system is equal and their sum is 0 (inductive reactance and capacitive reactance point to opposite directions if you think of them as vectors). What is left is only ohmic resistance which means current can flow freely in system creating mucho power which eventually burns the trafo in seconds when harmonic resonance occurs. Thats free energy right there.
Resonance occurs naturally in LC tank circuits. If your input frequency is not in the resonance point then more work is needed to get the power out. There is self inductance of primary and secondary that slow things down. Trafos in general work like this, you got lots of wire in primary around a core. So much that self inductance almost prevents current flow, little flux remains in the core. When you connect secondary to load current starts to flow in it creating opposite flux and what does it do to primary ? It creates more current in the same direction with the primary which reduces primarys self inductance. This in turn allows more current to flow in primary, costing money.
So self inductance wastes power and is bad. Resonance is good as it keeps oscillation ongoing at little effort, power is used only to overcome ohmic resistance. Resonance can be achieved easily with gabby as secondary does not affect the primary. Can anyone do some experiments to find resonance point ? You would put caps in parallel to primary and increase frequency of signal generator until little current would flow, this is the resonance point. All the action would still be in the primary, but current would not flow through it, current would flow in it. Then you add some load to secondary and resonance point should not change. Next you would need to add more turns or more caps to tune it to 50/60 hz. Once there, you got yourself resonant transformer which is always OU.
I try to do experiments with avoiding self inductance. I got small nanoperm core around which I am wounding caduceous coils. Caduceous coil resonates at all frequencies and it has zero impedance according to radio men. Maybe there is no effect at 50 Hz but will try it out still. I have currently wound 180 meters of wire around 63 diameter nanoperm toroid (80000 perm). Things proceed slow but steady, I will make some tests when I got 300 meters wound. I have other normally wound toroids using same amount of wire so I can compare them. I have blown my meter so I will use light bulbs from now on and other non scientific methods. That was my second casualty in OU war, lol.
My idea is that self inductance would be positive with caduceous type wound. Instead of choking input it would accelerate it as self inductance now always adds: adjacent wires always go in opposite directions so when self inductance occurs it does not go against current but adds to it. Maybe this would work in gabby too, but I see that there are other routes going on which seem interesting.
Quote from: Jack Noskills on February 01, 2012, 05:43:20 AM
I have been thinking would it be possible to use gabby as a resonant transformer. Problem with resonance is that point of resonance changes with load so you need to always tune it to output, or make the output part so that it does not affect input. I recently read article about harmonic resonance in trafos. It was said to avoid it at all cost, why ? Because at harmonic resonance total capacitance and inductance of the system is equal and their sum is 0 (inductive reactance and capacitive reactance point to opposite directions if you think of them as vectors). What is left is only ohmic resistance which means current can flow freely in system creating mucho power which eventually burns the trafo in seconds when harmonic resonance occurs. Thats free energy right there.
Resonance occurs naturally in LC tank circuits. If your input frequency is not in the resonance point then more work is needed to get the power out. There is self inductance of primary and secondary that slow things down. Trafos in general work like this, you got lots of wire in primary around a core. So much that self inductance almost prevents current flow, little flux remains in the core. When you connect secondary to load current starts to flow in it creating opposite flux and what does it do to primary ? It creates more current in the same direction with the primary which reduces primarys self inductance. This in turn allows more current to flow in primary, costing money.
So self inductance wastes power and is bad. Resonance is good as it keeps oscillation ongoing at little effort, power is used only to overcome ohmic resistance. Resonance can be achieved easily with gabby as secondary does not affect the primary. Can anyone do some experiments to find resonance point ? You would put caps in parallel to primary and increase frequency of signal generator until little current would flow, this is the resonance point. All the action would still be in the primary, but current would not flow through it, current would flow in it. Then you add some load to secondary and resonance point should not change. Next you would need to add more turns or more caps to tune it to 50/60 hz. Once there, you got yourself resonant transformer which is always OU.
I try to do experiments with avoiding self inductance. I got small nanoperm core around which I am wounding caduceous coils. Caduceous coil resonates at all frequencies and it has zero impedance according to radio men. Maybe there is no effect at 50 Hz but will try it out still. I have currently wound 180 meters of wire around 63 diameter nanoperm toroid (80000 perm). Things proceed slow but steady, I will make some tests when I got 300 meters wound. I have other normally wound toroids using same amount of wire so I can compare them. I have blown my meter so I will use light bulbs from now on and other non scientific methods. That was my second casualty in OU war, lol.
My idea is that self inductance would be positive with caduceous type wound. Instead of choking input it would accelerate it as self inductance now always adds: adjacent wires always go in opposite directions so when self inductance occurs it does not go against current but adds to it. Maybe this would work in gabby too, but I see that there are other routes going on which seem interesting.
Thats what a ballast is for you can pick them up at Menards for 30 bucks, I get them for free cause well Im me :), you still need the drop in pressure to get extra electron spin just like a old style vacuum tube, seal the shell with dielectric and the two halves of the shell become the magnetic cap. a interleaved or Vortex winding is prefreable like I have explained before in previous posts,
Wonder where you got those cores Im sure I know where you got 1 of them!
Mav
Cadacus and time manipulations sound intresting also the cadacues looks like a royal pain in the behind,
I have gotten a 2ft rodin coil to jump a bench and it self on a 240 -40 amp input, vortex winding is much the same as cadacus, the winds are seperated to not include cancelations, a 10 degree 5 degree and 3 degree seperation allows for extreme voltage out with out the heating cause by conventional winding as well it sweeps better towards PF 1 than conventional winding.
Sorry I haven't gotten a video up yet after I posted last week all hell broke loose at the church I work at seems someone feels the need to hack my wireless make a clone of the server and then make life ever so demanding on my part, problems solved tho. (Much ass kickery involved)
I am rounding out the last few turns on the device after this post and hope to have much good to report things are looking good although I fried a couple of ballasts, good thing they are free.
I haven't hit a point yet where she doesn't return more power out with less power in with as many turns as I have now, which is sweetness, she switches from quite to load at certain voltages a resonance cap if you will as you add more turns the cap gets a increase in voltage and decrease in amperage as one would expect (secondary gets a increase in power out to equal that of the diminished amperage in on the primary which is what we have been looking for) normally there is a spot where it does no good to add more turns but on this particular config it just gets better and better and better.
many weird things afoot I plan to document and should prove to be a nice kicker for conventional theory to prove.
Mav
I am using M-088 from magnetec. At the moment I am not planning to use a shell, just wind and wind. I divided the windings in the core in two halves, A and B, and now I have 10 layers of caduceus winds ready. So it is kind of experimental core, lots of wires coming out and to reconnect, 20 pairs. Now I can play with different layers, or sides, or both. It is like the Tesla rotating magnetic field trafo patent, but I am using two segments instead of four, because the toroid was too small to get 4 segments.
Idea came to my head last night, if I connect both sides together using a capacitor and charge one cap, would it self run ? Energy would be sloshed between two caps and energy would continually increase. Caduceous wind gets rid of self inductance, maybe thing would resonate. E-fields of the sides must oppose so when current runs in one side, it creates flux that creates current in the other side in correct direction. Difficult to explain properly but if this works I will draw a picture.
Quote from: Mavendex on February 01, 2012, 11:40:53 PM
Cadacus and time manipulations sound intresting also the cadacues looks like a royal pain in the behind,
I have gotten a 2ft rodin coil to jump a bench and it self on a 240 -40 amp input, vortex winding is much the same as cadacus, the winds are seperated to not include cancelations, a 10 degree 5 degree and 3 degree seperation allows for extreme voltage out with out the heating cause by conventional winding as well it sweeps better towards PF 1 than conventional winding.
Sorry I haven't gotten a video up yet after I posted last week all hell broke loose at the church I work at seems someone feels the need to hack my wireless make a clone of the server and then make life ever so demanding on my part, problems solved tho. (Much ass kickery involved)
I am rounding out the last few turns on the device after this post and hope to have much good to report things are looking good although I fried a couple of ballasts, good thing they are free.
I haven't hit a point yet where she doesn't return more power out with less power in with as many turns as I have now, which is sweetness, she switches from quite to load at certain voltages a resonance cap if you will as you add more turns the cap gets a increase in voltage and decrease in amperage as one would expect (secondary gets a increase in power out to equal that of the diminished amperage in on the primary which is what we have been looking for) normally there is a spot where it does no good to add more turns but on this particular config it just gets better and better and better.
many weird things afoot I plan to document and should prove to be a nice kicker for conventional theory to prove.
Mav
Again, looking forward to it more so now seeing how europe is being raped by a cold wave reminding us or me at least why I'm into this stuff :p.
Hello Mav, and all
I've been away for a while for work and was re-reading the progress and catching up on the info.
It sounds very interesting and the progress you have made in one year is overwhelming.
Just wondering how the video is going on, it would help clear up a lot of misunderstandings,
thank you so much for all your work so far in this field and I hope to be able to follow in your foot steps one day.
Matt
Hello Mav, any updates?
Hello Mav
I'm starting to get worried since its been a strangely long time since we last heard from you, in fact over 2 months now since you last checked in.
I hope all is well with you and that nothing untoward has happened, you haven't befallen any accidents, or anything like that.
Just getting concerning since you have gone so quiet for so long.
Just log in and tell us that you are Ok if nothing else...
Cheers
Sorry for the disappearing that hacker thing got real stupid took over my pc, churchs network, phone couldn't get on the internet. Church didn't want to pay me overtime for the work I was doing keeping thier stuff safe so I quit last week going to get my CEH and hunt those bastards down for making my life miserable, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NQbOG7STI7A&feature=channel (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NQbOG7STI7A&feature=channel) here is a quick video of small gain on the device. Ill do another one when I finish this guy up.
Mav
Nice work Mav. ;]
If your just using 60hz, those meters should be correct. Good Good Good.
Thanks for enduring so long on this. It just goes to show that large amounts of time and persistence CAN pay off in this business.
Some out there would not agree.
Mags
Quote from: Magluvin on April 10, 2012, 08:24:54 PM
Nice work Mav. ;]
If your just using 60hz, those meters should be correct. Good Good Good.
Thanks for enduring so long on this. It just goes to show that large amounts of time and persistence CAN pay off in this business.
Some out there would not agree.
Mags
Thanks Mags,
After that test I put a ballast in front of the transformer and the frequency dropped to 10 hz or so, but when I took readings at the ballast with my fluke the ballast was outputing 830 volts into the device at .15 amps @ 10hz probably what the ballast is set for, output of the device was 10hz 122volts 2.5 amps a nice almost 300 percent.
111 turns for secondary about 700 turns of primary, and the innercore was just holding the risidual power deffinitly more out than in @ 10hz when I input @ 60hz you could hear the hum of the magnetstrcition causeing problems in the shell which only made it about 105% effecient, so Im increaseing my secondary to 222 turns essentially doubling the output of the device, with 700 turns of primary.
Anomolies = 1 volt probe to 1 lead, 1 volt probe to ground in a potted plant = voltage reading on the fluke... about 280 volts out of the air, I think this is a function of the ballast or resonance or both. Ghost voltage was explained and they told me that if I grounded the other probe we would have a 0 reading on the lead, so since I actually grounded it theres still voltage we have a nice little unexplained deal going on.
Anomolies = 2 volt probes in the air = 10 volts reading on the fluke when the device is on, about 2 ft from the device. So she is creating a RF at 10hz won't work unless the balast is in place.
We are sending the device to have the secondary and primary profesionally wound.
Changes to the device was JBKwik on the outside to magnetically connect the shells, and then we put some copper foil around the outside gap and inside gap, this helped leverage the field, (the copper foil is sitting on the JB kwick and inner concotion of water weld and JBKwik on the inside gap still not connecting the shells)
input @ 10 hz I know is low but free energy is still that free energy, drop it into some caps and should be honky dory, increasing the windings on the secondary will give us more out and stacking cores, thinner shell, plus I found silicon steel innercores we can use price 60 bucks for the same size of toroid, vs 270 bucks out of germany, they will have a output of 2.0 teslas at saturation with the ability to move towards 2.5 teslas saturated like crazy.
Vs. the nanoperms which saturate at 1.2 teslas and are very expensive. all in all we can probably build these guys with the same design for less than 500 dollars,
Mav.
Good to hear you're still keeping it alive. The toroids by any chance are they toroidal cores used typically in audio amplifiers?
And wouldn't you kill for one of these :P :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6lvm3FGTHSI (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6lvm3FGTHSI)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E-FpeRf3RvQ
Crappy part is that they cost a fortune: http://www.ebay.com/itm/300mmOD-large-core-Toroidal-Transformer-Winding-Machine-/260597933444?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item3cacd8e584 (http://www.ebay.com/itm/300mmOD-large-core-Toroidal-Transformer-Winding-Machine-/260597933444?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item3cacd8e584)
However with the advent of 3d printing we can build things like that very easily ourselves.
Quote from: matthewklinko on April 03, 2012, 07:58:25 PM
Hello Mav, any updates?
Yes here's the best update
David Klingelhoefer, RemeroUK= FAKE
Whats wrong with you people?
Richard
I appreciate the vid, Mav -- very interesting and breathes some new life into this approach.
When you do another vid, may I suggest you take data over a sufficient time that the ENERGY can be shown, both input and output energy? I found an energy meter that measures down to 0.0001 kW-hr, whereas the Kill-a-Watt just gives down to 0.01 kW-hr. I found that by plugging one of these meters into the Kill-a-Watt, then plugging the test device into the 2-meter set, I can measure power (W) and energy (down to 0.1 Watt-hour) simultaneously; or I can measure watts on both and compare. The agreement has been within about 4% comparing meters in this way. I now have two meters of each type, so two paired-sets.
I would be glad to buy for you and send you two of these higher-precision meters for your work if you wish to try (at my expense of course). Then you could use one pair for input, and one pair for output. Really nails the measurement with this redundancy, adds confidence!
Let me know (you may email me directly at ProfSJones@gmail.com).
Good work! Thanks again for the vids.
Steven J
Attached photo shows the paired meters -- the one on top gives kW-hours down to 0.0001 precision, which I find very useful. Again, the redundancy in the meters allows for a good check. I have been using these pairs extensively of late.
Quote from: JouleSeeker on April 30, 2012, 02:24:53 AM
I appreciate the vid, Mav -- very interesting and breathes some new life into this approach.
When you do another vid, may I suggest you take data over a sufficient time that the ENERGY can be shown, both input and output energy? I found an energy meter that measures down to 0.0001 kW-hr, whereas the Kill-a-Watt just gives down to 0.01 kW-hr. I found that by plugging one of these meters into the Kill-a-Watt, then plugging the test device into the 2-meter set, I can measure power (W) and energy (down to 0.1 Watt-hour) simultaneously; or I can measure watts on both and compare. The agreement has been within about 4% comparing meters in this way. I now have two meters of each type, so two paired-sets.
I would be glad to buy for you and send you two of these higher-precision meters for your work if you wish to try (at my expense of course). Then you could use one pair for input, and one pair for output. Really nails the measurement with this redundancy, adds confidence!
Let me know (you may email me directly at ProfSJones@gmail.com).
Good work! Thanks again for the vids.
Steven J
Thanks I may take you up on that offer, but really I need something that can handle super high voltage I found that if I go over 180 volts on those killowatt meters they tend to fryout then I have to take it back to menards and get it replaced go go insurance.
I have been using a 110 watt florecent ballast as input for the last few times had 800 volts .15 amps going in and 120 v 2.5 amps comming out, so I had that device sent off to a company to wind it profesionally, and really get the boat a rockin should have some good results by monday im guessing we will output at least a few more amps since all the turns will be perfect.
the bad part about the ballast is it drops the frequency down to 10hz or so but free is free and there is always ways to store it I have another device here at the house Im going to video to show the anomolies I had a friend come buy we put one of my volt probes in a plant and took the other volt probe to a lead while the device was charged and got 300+ volts comming out of the machine as well the input leads from the ballast have a katty corner effect on the actual line comming off the ballast we have .15 amps which is normal its a 110 watt ballast its not going to output more than that but then if I run the clamp over the device lead that is connected to the ballast it will read something like .75 amps which is really wierd on the return its opposite .15 amps on the device lead and .75 amps on the line going back to the ballast.
so my guess on that is I can splice off those leads that say .75 and run that to a make before break switch and see if we can close the loop on input which would most fantastic. waiting on the switch from mouser should be here next week. Trial and error fun fun fun
Mav
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nxKERIvz8mw (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nxKERIvz8mw)
anomolies sorry bout the shaky video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rt5Mjau_Ehk (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rt5Mjau_Ehk)
another over
Quote from: wayne49s on March 23, 2011, 07:13:28 AM
I've been looking a bit more in detail how the device is suppose to work, and I don't believe this device works according to Thane's approach. To avoid the BEMF to the primary, Thane's approach was to move some of the magnetic flux from the secondary to a separate core (the secondary core). This requires that the secondary coil be wound over the 2 cores as pictured above. If you look at the Garbriel device, it is exactly the opposite; it is the primary core that encapsulates the 2 cores concentrically. According to Faraday's law, the magnetic flux from the secondary coil will impact and generate a BEMF in the primary coil since the primary coil turns are wrapped over the secondary core also.
If we were to apply Thane's approach to the toroid configuration, the primary and secondary coils would be switched (i.e. the primary on the inside toroid), and the higher permeability core on the outside also. In this way the outside secondary core would absorb most of the secondary flux and not impact on the interior primary coil to generate the BEMF.
Assuming we can replicate the results, it may be a lot tougher to explain how the device works, lol! If anyone sees something wrong in the analysis, let me know.
/Wayne
From my point of view all these devices are trying to duplicate the principles on the "Saturable Reactor".
The Stone. :)
@rfmmars
David Klingelhoefer is the original inventor of the Gabriel Device, right?
Is this device non-working or a fake? There is a big difference...
Can you elaborate why you think so?
@anyone else
Did anyone measure larger power output than the power input, on the Gabriel Device yet?
If yes then how was this measuremnt made?
Quote from: rfmmars on April 21, 2012, 08:49:06 PM
Yes here's the best update
David Klingelhoefer, RemeroUK= FAKE
@Mav. Its great to see you back, but by God you make me a nervous wreck watching your vids with you playing around with those live wires like that ! I don't know how you have the courage !!
No wonder a while ago, I thought you may have blown yourself up. If I had only known what you were doing with those live wires back then, I would have had even more reason to think that. :o
But it seems like you are having great success which I am ever so pleased to hear because we sure do need a product like this. So am looking forward to your next update/s with great keenness.
@verpies. I don't know who you are, nor have I seen you here before, but what a damned cheek you have coming in here and chucking your weight around like Lord Almighty.
I suggest you stay away if that's the way you are going to carry on.
Quote from: Cheap4All on May 25, 2012, 04:38:53 AM
@Mav. Its great to see you back, but by God you make me a nervous wreck watching your vids with you playing around with those live wires like that ! I don't know how you have the courage !!
No wonder a while ago, I thought you may have blown yourself up. If I had only known what you were doing with those live wires back then, I would have had even more reason to think that. :o
But it seems like you are having great success which I am ever so pleased to hear because we sure do need a product like this. So am looking forward to your next update/s with great keenness.
@verpies. I don't know who you are, nor have I seen you here before, but what a damned cheek you have coming in here and chucking your weight around like Lord Almighty.
I suggest you stay away if that's the way you are going to carry on.
Hey Cheap,
Thanks for the kind words I'm working diligently to get the next one rolling, I will be switching out my nanoperm core for Silicon Steel which will boost the output of the device dramatically, and drop the cost of building it quite a bit. I should have the next one finished up here in about 2 weeks or so with the silicon steel core and if Im right we will have a couple killowatts as long as we don't arc out.
I just make sure I don't touch the live wires :) I have shocked the crap out of my self and earned a few grey hairs but all in all we are moving along hopefully after this next one is built we will have the funding to go ahead and make megawatt devices. 999.5 Killowatts to go but dooable.
It runs, doesn't heat up like mad, the powerfactor stays at a nice comfortable 1 and we will have energy independence by the end of the year hopefully.
Keep on Keeping on, nothing can stop us now regardless of what ever my investors want to do I will have a nice chunk of change to spend on development thru my own enterprising efforts, you can be a genius but if you don't have skills that genius part is pretty damn worthless.
Mav
Great to hear the progress. I do see silicon steel cores as being a lot cheaper. Are these grain oriented ones? BTW please consider buying a box of those surgical gloves $5 to $10 for a hundred of them. Lots of uses.... including saving your life from shocks and they don't interfere much with holding small things ;) Not really for high voltage but it adds a layer of protection from the power you might get hit with through moisture in your skin. Or any kind of glove gives you some protection. I know it's hard to want to put them on but you are worth saving :)
Thanks E2,
Today while I wait for my new machine to be finished Im going to attempt to put a caduceus like winding on a completed gabby toroid and use the ballast to power it in series and in parallel (two seperate experiments), Ive read several things in this forum and others about this type of coil but can't find any instances where the caduceous winding has been applied to a toroidal transformer. Ive heard time travel, ZPE, and all sorts of crazy stuff. So I figure if we can find the best way to charge the device we can then pull even more out or... get sucked thru a time vortex to the center of the earth at which point Ive been shifted in to the 5th dimension and subjected to amazon women that have advanced crystal matrix's swirling and whirling around so giant dinosaurs can roam free. :D Like I said Im bored
So lets get a little more dangerous and start playing with scaler waves, mabye the caduceous coil does eminiate scaler waves if true the shield should have no effect on and the innercore will instantly be charged to max level vs power in. I have no clue never messed with it but Im really bored.
Mav
Yep I've read all those things about Caduceus also including some fairly wild testimonies many years ago. Most people who have played with them do recommend being very careful. That toroid Caduceus is most fascinating to me but I'm too chicken (or lazy to build one) - well I might try if I had one to play with.... I've tried some fairly crazy things at times. So don't take so long to check back in here or we'll have to assume you got captured by those Amazon women ;)
Just checking the progress here, and wanted to make a few observations/questions
Is the reason that you have ceased making videos and sharing information the financial status of your work?
Is there a reason that you have decided not to open source this device 100%? and are you changing the recipe that you are promulgating because you want to protect IP? and this is in reference to the core change, the lack of info, etc etc.
Lastly, has anyone succeeded in replicating this?
Quote from: importfanatik on April 29, 2011, 09:58:11 AM
Well,. I gave it a shot,. but had no luck at all.
But it should be noted that I didnt use a nanoperm core, and the scale is smaller, so its not a true replication and can't really validate if Mav's claims are true or false.
Here is what I built:
Toroid Core: Ferrite ( i think)
Outer Shell: mild steel, 4.5" OD, 1.5" ID
Outer shell halves are insulated with electrical tape.
Primary 80 turns clockwise
Secondary 304 turns clockwise
Power: 12V car battery -> 60 watt inverter -> "gabriel" transformer in series with 60watt light bulb.
Secondary shows 12VAC ( i had to remove alot of turns from the primary to get it UP to 12V)
Used 4 diodes (bridge rectifier) to get that to what I expected to be 12V DC.
According to the multimeter it is 5.4V DC (weird,. i must have done something wrong).
Tried to run that to a car headlight but no luck,. maybe because the voltage isnt right,.
Oh well,.. was a fun experiment in any case and I learned a little about electricity.
Edit: I forgot to mention, primary and secondary are both 18ga magnet wire
If you use 220 volts, for primary need more turns, expeshaly if you use smaller steel ring and not 120 volts but 220 volts. You need about 400-600 turns, not 80 for 220 volts. For 120 volts about 200-300 turns.
Hi to all
i read the whole thread yesterday and my question is why the discussion stoped.Has nobody else than Mavendex the device running?Has somebody made it running for 220V?
Thanks
Why did development on this tech stop?
Quote from: Feynman on February 18, 2014, 09:10:53 PM
Why did development on this tech stop?
In response to this posted reply and the one immediately previous to it...?
I'm on a small, fixed income while living in San Francisco (read: expensive; high standard of living). But I did have the inspiration of taking the output coil and have the leads of it wired to another complete Gabriel Machine stage after it the amplify the output of the first stage.
(All theoretical at this point in time, of course.)
What I can do inexpensively right now is take a large cast iron nut from a street lamp that fell off into the gutter, and then use a smaller paper tube 'toroid' inside it for for the output stage. Winding the coils may take some time, but I have these parts now---or I should have them.
Questions? Comments?
--Lee
BTW...
Others may have their own opinions why research ended on this thread. Are they out there to give their opinions for us to read?
Feyman:
I am wondering exactly the same thing, I have read the entire thread and looks like Mav disappeared before posting any results on the silicone steel core construction which to me is the modern equivalent of the Tesla patent. Any news or updates on this one from anyone is appreciated as I personally will be trying to replicate the Tesla equivalent of this with modern materials myself to try and verify the phase shift which to me is the equivalent of OU as all the inductive energy can be recovered with DC Pulsed operation very easily with a simple diode. Anybody other than Mav actually manage to achieve the phase shift in secondary current vs primary as per Mav 's posts and the tesla patent?
Ok, so since nobody is saying anything about this tech or what happened here I am building a test device with large silicon steel toroid core with 18awg wire and 4 layers of 22awg low carbon weld steel as shell. Just need top and bottom of shield then wind primary around shell. I will use scope to check it out and get proper readings. Any comments or tips are appreciated, will try and post more pics of build when I get the top and bottom layers of shell cut out but need some sheets 8 inches across to make the parts from first. The inner core i am using is 7.2" od, 2.75" I'd and about 1.25" thick with 190 t main winding first layer. Shell layers are insulated from each other with layer of clear tape to minimize eddy losses. Major losses in steel will most likely be from hysterysis, magnetorestriction and of possibly losses from the saturation of shell.
-boots
Real Boots,
that's looking good so far. Tho I have to say I am a little concerned about the outer shelf not following the round shape of the coil. Also, as the shelf as well as the core should be of the same material to remain predictable, and since the shelf construction is not so easy, I consider the Gabriel device a not so easy to make thing. Although with a ribbon of metglass it may be easy. Or some sort of core casting.
If you however get unsatisfying output, then you may think about to use the original, simple Bi toroid transformer BiTT design by Thane Heins, that is the underlying principle of the Gabriel device. Tho, the Gabriel device is one elegant thing! Kind of like given by extraterrestals :) .
The BiTT is a real thing , although it requires reactive power from mains AC. This may be for free on the bills, but it takes some Energy to provide this reactive power. I'd like to discuss, if in the end of the day there is real OU, when using reactive power with a power factor of near zero (which is what BiTT is about), or if it's just cheating on the bill.
The gabriel design also requires a certain operation power, so the inner coil and core will not affect the outer coil with shelf directly (other than inducing the current), furthermore the mass and permeability of the shelf needs to be higher than that of the core.
Regards
dieter;
thank you for the comments, also good to see someone is interested in this other than myself. This build is meant as an experiment not a replication per say, just trying to get a feel for what tesla was describing for myself. I am starting to doubt that this is indeed the same as the bitt by thane, I have built many versions of the bitt and only seen the described input current dropping upon loading secondaries when I was using cheap meter across shunt but when measured with scope it is clear that the distortions in the waveform are tricking the meter to think the current is dropping. I am not convinced the bitt works as thane describes or claims.
Have you seen clear evidence yourself that the bitt works as claims and is not simply measurement error?
There are definitely some issues with the EM concepts and assumptions I was taught in schooling however or else the meg would be working wonders already. Just trying to get a better grasp for myself of what is missing from my textbooks. Will post as I get more built on this one.
Cheers;
-boots
Real Boots,
Here's a simple test I've made, pimping a E core up to a BiTT core:
www.overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg396221/#msg396221 (http://www.overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg396221/#msg396221)
What finally made the killawatt meter drop to zero, was adding a cap of a certain capacitance. As described there, the wall supply remained cool, even although the supply was connected to this 13 Ohm load,hat normaly would be a 10x overload. Yet the output was useable, even more than without cap and core mod. Unfort. I got only a software scope with a mono mic input, so I cannot compare Voltage vs Current / Phase shift.
I totally agree with you about the text books, disguising and hiding the fundamental understandings. Even Steinmetz used simplified equations, to keep things on a accepted level, knowing that they were not really correct. Heaviside, an other early investigator of electricity, came to such controversal conclusions that the authorities forbid him to publish his work... even although he was a true academic. So his writings may be interesting.
The BiTT theory is based on the assumption that the back magnetomotive force of the flowing current in the induced will bring the primary in phase, which is basicly where I have to throw in a couple of question marks.
I do however know that I am just a hobbyist, but maybe that makes me explore the unexplored.
Looking forward to see more of your work.
Regards
Quote from: Feynman on March 22, 2011, 04:07:09 PM
The Gabriel Device, possible COP=8
Operation: Thane Heins effect based device.
Replication: None yet.
Closed-loop: Not attempted, can fry the windings without input current control circuitry. (i.e. inverter, battery charger , and battery)
Independent Verification: The Heins' effect has been independently verified, but Klingelhoefer's implementation has not.
Input: 120VAC at 0.5Amp
Output: 120VAC at 4Amp
You can read my comments to this in the Thane Heins thread here
Thane Heins BI-TOROID TRANSFORMER
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7833.msg278868#new (http://www.overunity.com/7833/thane-heins-bi-toroid-transformer/msg278868/#new)
I will be attempting replication and am in contact with David Klingelhoefer. Exciting stuff.
Let's hope it's not a measurement error, but I have high hopes.
Cheers,
Feynman
"From pes "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). [/size]His output is 800% that of the primary consumption!"[/size]
What be load?
After a grewling amount of cutting metal with jigsaw, grinding, sanding and winding wire etc, got this contraption ready to start testing. Used jb kwik weld to join the bottom to center and outside portions of shell. Outside winding is 112 turns of 24awg wire I had laying around, will see how it works before committing my good 18awg wire to the project.
-boots
That's looking good, but it seems I do not understand the GD... I thougth both, primary and secondary are inside?!? What's that outside winding?
Also, permeability is altered by mechanical and heat treatment locally, a core may or should be tempered @ 250°C for a half a day to equalize permeability.
Regards.
Using variac so far seems like normal transfo. Using main secondary winding for load with output at 120v into 100w incandescent bulb I get 1.46amps at 97vAc on the input. Starts humming at about 1.5-1.7amps where saturation seems to start however didn't have scope on current waveform to be sure yet.
At least this thing seems useful unlike the BITTs I tried to build. Will post more when I can get scope to measure phase angle and real power.
-boots
Dieter;
The outside wind is primary, I put few different ones on inner core for flexability, inner ones are secondaries. Did try two shorted 10turn winds on inner core and got no output with 35vac in, looks like that idea is bunk so far, will see what scope shows with those two 10t windes left open.
Mag was reporting that shorted turns got rid of reflections, not consistent with what I am seeing thus far.
-boots
Sounds good so far.
Regards
Scope is in parallel with yellow current meter measuring current on input. Black digital meter is on output volts into two 60w bulbs so 120w approx on output while 1.69amps on input (fairly clean sine wave on input current) at about 103vac in. With load open Circuit got about 135vac on output with distorted current input wave showing about 1amp on input current meter.
Also included shot of raised input volts raised until input current distorted showing unusual distortions in the input current wave(same 2x60w bulbs as load). Next update when I put 2ch digital scope on here to measure phase between input and output and calculate real input power.
Anyone got any idea why all my pics show upside down?! Sorry for the eye strain, wasn't my intention.
-boots
That's indeed strange. Maybe try an other export program. I am currently using Artweaver, which is ok for small tasks. Gimp is a bigger download, but more "en par" with photoshop.
Interesting wave distortion, maybe a feedback. kind of.
Looking forward to see Power factor...
You say input is 100 volts and 1.69 amps, output is two 120 W lamps, right? So that voltage acros this lamps?
Yes, two 60w bulbs in parallel with output at 120vac. Bulbs are only rated at 120vac so that is the only output volts you can run at and be fairly sure you know the power unless you are measuring out current and volts. Incandescent bulbs may be quite nonlinear, I know their resistance changes a lot when the filament is at different temps. Will need to borrow that 2ch scope again to get any more meaningful data.
Oh, just realized that in an above post I said it was mags that suggested the shorted turns to reduce reflections, that is incorrect, I meant to say Mavendex was the one that suggested shorted turns.
-boots
Isn't the shell-core also a coil, a one turn short circuited one?
Regards
Dieter;
The inside top edge of the shell is insulated between the two pieces with electrical tape to prevent the shell from as you mention being a shorted turn itself. Also I insulated the plates of steel that comprise the shell from each other with packing tape to reduce eddy current losses which will eat up power like crazy and produce heat in the shell if not prevented. I just realized that putting the main secondary wires through the shell in the way I did must be causing losses as well, should have current leaving through same opening that it enters or else you have shorted turn in essence around the wires in the shell itself. In power panels you always run neutral and hot through same opening in steel enclosure or else metal will heat up around wires.
Boots,
Ok, I see. People often use a steel, copper or alu pipe as a core substitute, not knowing about that (and the enormous amperage in such a coil). Didn't know about the Hot/neutral wire thing tho.
When will you have the two channel scope?
Regards
Hooked up scope last night, very disappointed as i only get 10 deg phase angle between current and volts on input with 120w output at 120vac out into two 60w bulbs. Power calc gave 158w in with 120w out.
Tried to compare phase of input volts to output volts with same 120w load but it appears to be in phase or 180deg out depending on polarity I connect scope probe. Tesla patent mentioned phase shift but I am not seeing it at all, anybody know if tesla actually built the transfo described in the patent?
Perhaps if I could run it at 800hz or something phase shift would appear? Any ideas on this are appreciated.
-boots
Quote from: Real Boots on April 15, 2014, 10:23:07 PM
Hooked up scope last night, very disappointed as i only get 10 deg phase angle between current and volts on input with 120w output at 120vac out into two 60w bulbs. Power calc gave 158w in with 120w out.
Tried to compare phase of input volts to output volts with same 120w load but it appears to be in phase or 180deg out depending on polarity I connect scope probe. Tesla patent mentioned phase shift but I am not seeing it at all, anybody know if tesla actually built the transfo described in the patent?
Perhaps if I could run it at 800hz or something phase shift would appear? Any ideas on this are appreciated.
-boots
Hey RB
I used to follow here but it died out.
What I remembered was that the input needed to be variable to adjust the phase shift. If the input is to strong, on a particular build, not much phase shift as it over powered the shielding of the shield. And too little input, no output at all, due to not being able to produce flux beyond the shield. Do you have a way of varying the input?
I believe Tesla said the the transformer needed to be designed for a particular input to operate properly. So if you have it built already, then you need to adjust your input to match that build. That is why Gabriel used the toaster in series with the primary, as it happened to work as the input adjustment needed for his build. ;) Freq should not be to important, just not too high for the inductances.
Mags
Also, one of the key workings is the inner core of the secondary. When the primary flux level is able to penetrate the shield, that flux continues one to be attracted to the sec inner core, in which the flux induces current in the sec along the way. Then the sec flux, because it is carrying current now, is suppose to be mostly if not all attracted to the inner core and not affecting the primary like a normal transformer does. Once the inner core contains a combination of flux from bot the pri and sec, it has to be able to contain all that flux to avoid saturation. So the sec loading also need to be of a particular value also, 'for a particular build', so as to not produce to much flux as to bring the inner core close to or beyond saturation. Your inner core looks of good size to work with decent power levels. ;) Let the core be with you. ;D The thickness of the shielding, and material used, determines how much input needed to break through the shield to get to the inner core, as the shield needs a certain amount of input for the primary flux to saturate it. And any power input beyond that point of saturation(rising ac sine voltage and current in the primary) the additional flux beyond that point then passes through to the inner core. So thin shield, less input to get correct phase shift, and thick shield, more input to get the same phase shift. ;)
So first adjust your input for phase correction, then start adding load. Increase the load until there is a phase difference then back off on the load till phase is back to max shift and that will be the target input and output for your particular build. ;)
I have to look back and see, its been a while, but I believe you want your input limiter to be resistive(toaster). Not sure if a toaster has much inductance to affect the primary or circuit response overall much. That is a resistive limiter if not using a controllable ac input.
Mags
mags;
I used a variac on input, cannot see any phase shift of significance from primary to secondary, adjust variac till I see 120vac on load. Tried single 60w bulb as well and still got power factor very close to 1.
Could my shield be too thin for 60hz? Shield is 3 plates thick of about 1mm thick steel insulated between plates to reduce eddy losses.
-boots
You call it shield, but isn't it more of a core? And for a core, yes, 3mm seems too little. I have experienced undesired effects in using thin elements for inductive flux guide. You may try to add some layers on top, tho, not funny to rewind that outside coil.
Can you try to run the prim. in series and /or parallel with a cap of high capacitance? would be interesting to see possible changes in the PF.
Regards
Mags;
So I read over your response and fired this thing up again with load attached but very small input current and like 5vac on the primary. Adjusted variac on input till I saw the max phase shift(30deg). Put 3.3ohm resistor on load due to low out volts and phase from primary voltage to secondary voltage increases to about 35deg however input current also rises. Definitely no over unity on this the way it is right now but phase shift increase when lower resistance is added to secondary is interesting. Will try and see if I can find a constant current on secondary sweet spot by trying varying load resistances. Tesla mentioned two features in the patent, one being phase shift from primary to secondary and the other being constant secondary current when it's setup certain way.
Dieter;
The outer shell is a core but from what I understand it is a shield to delay the flux from entering the secondary not high flux carrying like the inner core. Problem I was seeing is that at high flux on primary the shield wasn't shielding hardly at all, need to lower primary flux to see shield effect apparently.
-boots
Lower resistance load on secondary gives more phase shift but lower total output power as the output volts drops with input at 6-7vac while input power and current goes up. Without any load on secondary there is no phase shift to be found on this build so far.
-boots
Sorry Rb, I just got in from work a bit ago and was posting in another thread last night late.
Your shell, is it insulated like the shell described, where the bottom half is not electrically connected to the top half?
gots to showa. Mags dirty. Work Work work work work. I tell ya, Im 48 and recent years Ive had pain in my hands(joints), wrists, right knee, and more recently for months, my lower back. And neck sometimes.
Started drinking raw milk a month and a half ago. 2 gal in that period. not a lot. All the pains I described are gone, nill, nuttin, nada. ALL gone. ;) Inflamation. And non pasteurized milk has live enzimes and bacteria that fight inflammation. My buddy has been telling me about this for over a year, and now, Im a believer. To be able to bend down and pick something up without blurting Oooo OHHhh, or just ride my bike and the wrists ache. Squeezing a pair of pliers only as hard as the pain would let me. And then being able to do it all again really takes some getting used to after years of unconsciously training my self for limits of what I could do before maximum, or even minimum pain levels.
I didnt realize it all at first. I was at work and I was squeezing my fists for some odd reason and noticed I was doing it. Then I realized I could squeeze way tighter than I have been for some years now. And when I put it all together, I realized all of them were gone. A very strange feeling to have. Like a miracle really. here one day gone the next, and still gone later? ;) ;)
And energy levels through the roof. Like being in the 20s again. No joke. I may just have more time for this stuff now cuz it doesnt take me long to get the necessities done now. Not that felt like doing much of anything if I didnt have to. :(
If interested, find some organic farm stores in your area and see if they have it. If so, they got raw butter, yogurt and the buttermilk is gone before you see it come in. ;) But the milk is the one to do.
Had a thyroid problem for over 8 years. Like half a peach on the right side of the adams apple. A few months ago, I started taking selenium, in a month and a half I noticed it some what smaller. 2 weeks later just noticeable. Now just a small tiny itty bitty, cant see it but can feel it just a bit. ;D
I thought at first it was the magnesium because I started that just before the shrinking began. But I looked them up on a very cool vitamin site, and for selenium, it only said thyroid, magnesium no thyroid listed.
I took 2 weeks off of the selenium and it came back. Started taking it again, nada bump. lol
5 bucks sundown naturals.
My friend I have known for a couple years asked me recently what happened to it. I told her and she said her cousin is worse than mine was and was going to tell her about it. like clockwork, a month and a half later noticeable difference, and 2 weeks later her doctor said they didnt understand it. ::) My friend also has 3 other family members, all with lumpy thyroid and they are now recovering also, I cant say its actually recovering, but it is a fix if you take the selenium at least every other day after max shrinkage.
Some may say, Mags, 8 years? Did you go to the doctor? lol, My friends family members have been being treated for it for years and they were worse than I was before he started the selenium.
So no. I didnt see a doctor for it. ;)
Sorry for the health stuff. I just wanted to share as many even younger people get these afflictions and these things I have presented are real and I highly recommend them.
The raw milk was a monster for me. In a way, I have been partially debilitated with the hand, knee and back pains and just living with it. I can literally bust out 10 squats without a wimper. lol
But the hands and back were more in the way of doing things like putting on socks and shoes, getting up from a chair, etc.
Mags
Mags;
Good to hear about the raw milk, makes total sense to me as all milk contains mothers immunity, that is how all mammals develop their young's immune system with passive immunity through milk which would probably be burnt up In Pasteurization. My sister would freak on me though as she is health inspector, problem is in mass distribution where you need to pasteurize it to kill bugs that get in there from everything related to mass production. Almost need your own cow but not really an option for city people.
In regards to the test last night, I am wondering how the heck others got any phase shift at all with such small cores and thin shells as per the start of this thread. I read this entire thread before beginning this project, pretty darn confused at this point and starting to wonder if some posters were trying to deceive or not take proper measurement data.
-boots
It may however be, that certain devices need a certain load to run 90° deg out of phase, but do consume current without load. You can still use such a system to eg. load batteries, or pump up water or other weights to store energy in gravity (for a gravity motor).
If phase shift is what you're after, then check this out:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Hr2C1vvvx4 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Hr2C1vvvx4)
Seems to be the real deal. Makes me think of a circuit that adjusts the capacity automaticly, to get a 90° phase shift with any load.... hmm...
Regards
PS. milk rocks 8) . Lotsa vitamin A and C.
Quote from: dieter on April 18, 2014, 01:24:21 AM
...
If phase shift is what you're after, then check this out:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Hr2C1vvvx4 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Hr2C1vvvx4)
Seems to be the real deal. Makes me think of a circuit that adjusts the capacity automaticly, to get a 90° phase shift with any load.... hmm...
...
Hi Dieter,
Sorry to "chime in", but I wonder whether you have noticed gotoluc's comment made under his video abt 3 months ago? It turns out that 2 different things 'joked' him. This is his comment under his video you gave the link above:
"To all who have not been following the forum topic at Overunity .com?... user id poynt99 has identified an error in my scope settings. I was using AC coupling for my power measurements when it should be set at DC coupling. I'm not the only one that was doing this.Two other experimenters said they were doing the same thing. I've since re-tested everything with the scope on DC coupling and I now see no real power gain or advantages in the circuit as when I was first testing with AC coupling. There is a big difference in results from AC to DC coupling as far as scope math is concerned.
It's also clear that a plug in meter cannot calculate a 90 degrees phase shift power correctly. So results using just that need to be questioned.
As for my generator tests, even though they had no effect on the gen prime mover the energy source has been identified by user id TinMan that it was a transfer of power from the gens exciter field to the load and which by coincidence had no effect on the prime mover.
So two different things happening which made the results look good but now look like there is no real power gain after all.
Maybe reactive power can be used to an advantage if you had a circuit which would use the return cap discharges (at 45 degree) and convert it to mechanical power (like I thought my generator was doing) or shore it in a battery. But none of this is happening if using single phase grid or gen. A 90 degrees phase shift for the single phase grid is like a short circuit and the wires just heat up.
That's where things are at this time. Sorry if you were not informed. In the future it would be best to use the link to the forum topic which are in the about tab under all my videos. This way you would be the most up to date with the research.
All the best in your experiments. Luc"
Gyula
If I can get ou I will make it usefull even if it's 10mw I will find a way to scale it up I promise you. For now I would be happy to replicate a useful version of what tesla described.
That video does stress what I think is happening to most people who think they have found ou however, "measurement error" is our enemy, we must make all efforts to debunk our own builds in order to really see what is going on. False info in the form of measurement error is bad for everyone. Even if an experiment doesn't have the nice result you are hoping for if you take proper measurements it is not a waste of time! A negative result is still a result!
For my little project shown above I am debating whether or not to rip off the primary and add more shell, can add another 1mm to shell thickness but it would be a pain in the butt for sure as the 2 spare plates I have left for top and bottom are not cutout yet and would be another session of jigsaw and tin snip hell for sure.
I have also been thinking about another idea as well, what do you all think about a 3 core gabby? Inner toroid with output coil wrapped in magnetic shield as per tesla patent, then a second coil shorted possibly around that magnetic shell, then an outer shell and the primary around the outer shell? If indeed we can get phase shift through each shell then we may be able to double the phase shift in such a way?
-boots
Boots,
You may try that, but it sounds like a lot of work. Basicly, in a transformer the phase shift is in 90° when there is no load. What does that mean? A load means we let the current flow in the secondary. Only then it causes the opposing magnetic field. This field or flow will force the primary in 0° phase IF IT REACHES THE PRIMARY. At this point, we have to confess that science does not fully understand induction yet (just like gravity): the core does arrange the magnetic flux, practicly absorbs any surrounding "fieldlines", so why in the world should those field lines have any impact on the copper in the secondary at all, they never get close! (see also Dollard lectures about this subject). My intuitive interpretation is: They don't. The magnetic field does not cause the current directly, but when the atomic structure is released from the magnetic field, they snap back to their basic equilibrium and this motion causes a pulse of a certain mysterious, yet unknown energy or radiation that kicks asses of surrounding copper electrons. This explains why a current is induced only when the magnetical field changes. Very intuitive 8) .
Basicly, we just have to care about the opposite field, or Back MMF. We need something like a magnetical diode.
Heins approach was, to offer a big outer core to the BMMF, so it won't fight the MMF of the primary. You said, it didn't work, ok. I also still see a problem in that design, because the BMMF like any MMF wants to close a loop, but faces a like pole from the other secondary and cannot effectively close that loop. It may be better to use only one secondary, as seen in early Heins designs.
I think for the Gabriel device the same principle applies. Trap the BMMF in a seperate core, but don't let the Forward MMF use that seperate core to skip the secondary coils. Be aware of airgaps, even thin insulations or uneven surfaces, act as a substancial barrier to the magnetical flux, so you should isolate only the top of the plate, as thin as possible.
This may be the basic philosophy you have to follow, separate the BMMF from the primary flux. knowing that the BMMF appears only during field changes, which means in a AC transformer at the primary peak voltages there is NO BMMF, but as the wave rises or sinks, there is most BMMF, so while the primary voltage AND field is zero, the BMMF is fully active.
Gyulasun,
well that's bad news. Clearly, those who read are in advantage :-[ .
But I have to say, I am having problems with this explanation. Scope needs DC coupling? The hole thing in every aspect is about AC, so why DC coupling? But ok, but then the mover/exiter energized the alternator coincedently? Come on. (not losing speed on load is fundamental) Maybe it was just Lucs Belief that was lost on the run and this altered reality on a omnidimensional quantum space level? Or Luc was replaced by a naysaying Android made in Langley 8) . kidding.
I hear your words, but I have to say, I've heard this before and I personally made successful tests: You can bring your current out of phase with caps and yet consume energy from the circuit. I was even capable of getting more output than without phase shift, so to me this chapter is not yet closed.
Theoreticly, when you feed a transformer with a +90° current, then it should run with a 0° phase unloaded, but with a +90° current when fully loaded.
Whether this is free energy or just tricking the power company is an other question tho.
Regards
Dieter;
I am starting to think the concept of flux is flawed and not reflective of what is going on. I measure the inductance of my primary and it is something like 100mh but keeps dropping on the meter with secondary open cct. When I short the secondary it immediately drops to the 4 to 5 mH range. This tells me that no matter the magnitude of the primary current there is immediate reflection into primary to cause the current to rise when load is applied.
The interesting thing I am seeing is that when you overload the secondary with very light primary mmf ( 6 vac) the secondary goes further out of phase. In normal transfo the two should get closer in phase when load is applied.
There is still reflection here as primary current does rise much more than what is phase shifted. In fact power measurements show it eats much more energy than secondary produces in this condition.
The flux concept must be flawed, perhaps we need to think of this as not field lines themselves but as applied field gradients following the natural curvature in space time that must be created along its own axis by the presence of the high perm material itself(iron core and steel shield)?
Starting to think the iron has virtual field lines that become real as applied field fills the iron, that is why my inductance meter sees secondary core and not shielded as you may expect by the outer core.
With the design I chose to build it is possible to thicken the shell, i may need to do this to get further useful data to see what difference and trends we see.
-boots
What happened to user Mavendex?
Looks like he pretty much proven the concept here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rt5Mjau_Ehk
So where is he?
Why no new videos?
Last post two years ago he said he wanted to scale up.
Boots,
I totally agree about the "fieldlines" being a simplification, mainly invented to allow for simple 2D illustration in school books. When you watch a ferromagnetofluid in action, it becomes more clear how the field interacts.
I prefer the term "magnetical vector" instead of field, because it isn't just a field, but a force and a direction. On the ferromagnetic side it is an anomaly in gravity. Probably more mysterious is the electroinductive property. The elementary magnets in eg. iron, as they are called, the tiny partical features, are then elementary magnet vectors. Chaoticly aligned in the matter. As a magnetical vector may also use air, the elementary magnet vectors EMV must be a feature of a particle that can be found in any matter, most likely part of the proton or electron or both. In ferromagnetic matter this feature must be highly increased, which we may consider being a useful marker in order to understand the processes.
Additionally there seems to be almost something like intelligence when a path can be closed. The magnetical path acts like a jetstream trough matter, including air, but especially iron. "Don't seek no longer, we have found the path!" seem the EMVs on the path to say to the other ones, and indeed, they relax and go into their chaotical equilibrium, while in the jetstream every available EMV is drafted to be aligned with the macro vector.
Got to eat my dinner before it's burned, so... to be continued...
continuing...
So this jetstream between north and south is probably what Ledskalnin meant by "Magnetical Current".
The saturation of a core seems to be the result of a copper coil, being able to transfer its area of impact from its own atoms to the core mass, which indicates that EMV activity is not bound to the atoms of the coil itself, but to the "radiant radiation" 8) of the coil, that is not magnetism by itself, but is cumulated in surrounding permeability peak areas. This explains jetstreams, at least partially.
There may be a reverse mechanism, where EMV activity in a core causes an Anti radiation that is able to cumulate in nearby matter of high electrical conductivity and finally causes electron charge separation, known as induction. Both processes may run simultanously.
Well, there's a lot of things to learn and to understand.
Your measurement of inductance seems to be fine when you consider that a small current is sent trough the probes. The shell does not shield because the secondary picks up the magnetism and forwards it to the inner core. I bet in the inner core the MMF is out of phase.
Nonetheless, the primary can see the inner core because first of all coupling is fine, and second of all the probe current is extremly small, so any BMMF can easily build a parallel path to the MMF path in the same core part. At least I think so.
Having losses as you described could be due to eddy currents, but since we are playing with the phase shift you should also keep an eye on the unloaded phase to see if it dissipates due to an angle other than 90°, and, if you like, try to push it to +90° or -90° with a cap in series, to see if it makes any diffrence.
Regards
I only have a small AC cap from a microwave at hand, tried it as you mention but it is too small to have any effect. The strange thing I am seeing is that there is almost no phase shift with no load or high resistance load, when I overload the secondary with only 6vac on primary (outer winding around shell) then the phase shift increases. This is in fact opposite what normal transfo would do however I assure u it eats energy like crazy when you pull down the secondary like that to get max phase shift. I have reduced eddy losses to a minimum with this build by using thin layers of steel with insulating tape in between layers so I expect only major losses in cores to be from hysterysis and magnetorestriction but those seem small compared to what eddy losses could lose if layers were not used. Wondering what layer of bisthmith powder in between shell and inner core would give for phase shift....
-boots
Boots,
make shure the insulation layers aren't too thick, otherwise the permeability could be reduced on one axis. In fact, eddy currents may be a minor problem up to a few hundred Hertz AC as far as I know.
For the cap, simply use two electrolytic caps, connected with eachother at their plus pole, this substitutes an AC cap. In fact, electrolytic caps may even be used directly (a single one) in proper AC, because the the damage due to the wrong polarity of one halfwave is auto-repaired during the next halfwave. Just stay rather far away from the caps' max voltage. Try 100 uF. When you use two, use 200uF each, as the series reduces capacitance (and increases the allowed voltage).
When you watch the QEG diagram, you'll notice two of four coils are only connected to eachother, basicly two coils shortened, and they got a cap in series with their short circuit... they must have been thinking something when they did this.
That said, I yet have to see a QEG in operation.
Regards
Dieter;
Eddy currents are basically shorted turns inside the core when the core is electrically conductive so they are the major losses at any frequency with electrically conductive cores unless they are prevented by construction methods such as insulating thin layers or using small diameter insulated iron wire. Hysterysis is the big one that is material dependent, carbon In the steel dramatically increases hysterysis losses.
I have made a new smaller test device closer in design to the tesla patent 433702 to investigate further before I rip apart the large device to revamp it in the hope that the smaller device will help me understand best way to improve large device. I used paddle wire to construct inner core and the shield, that stuff is cheap (like 3$ canadian a paddle from walmart) and used two paddles for the inner core and 2 for the shield. The shield was not easy to construct. I will be testing it shortly but initial tests show significant phase shift. See attached pics of unit during constructon and when ready to test.
-Boots
I forgot to mention something important about the 26 gauge paddle wire(floral wire), the green paint is most likely lead based so please take this in mind while working with it. Wear gloves and wash your hands frequently while working with it.
-boots
This looks awesome!
Thanks for the info about the green color. Had no problems yet, but good to know.
Regards
See pic showing input volts on dvm, current into primary across a 100 ohm resistor in series with primary on ch A, and output volts on B across a 100 ohm load resistor.
-boots
I think you misunderstand what Tesla was referring to Phase Shift. The Magnetic shielding is another way to create the phase shift. But the REAL reason of which Tesla is successful on the IN Phase- Phase Shift is because of his novel design with the [[Converter/Transformer]] which he used the Magnetic Shield to add the effect. Most people really think of that patent as the only reason that Tesla talk about the no opposing Phase Shift. It is the Transformer design which Tesla invented that he improved until to the perfection of Wireless Transmission of Energy. It is that transformer/converter design that he always achieve greater output than input. The magnetic shielding is just an another improvement. ::)
I totally agree!!! ;D ;D with you @[dieter] about the concept of the INDUCTION you have describe. You guys are doing great!! Keep looking and testing. The purpose of this post is to let us investigate the other REAL reason of this so called perfect Phase Shift.
It is that similar looking Transformer/ device which Tesla always called a Machine because it performed like a machine does. ;D
Meow ;D ;D
Quote from: Real Boots on April 27, 2014, 11:53:39 AM
I forgot to mention something important about the 26 gauge paddle wire(floral wire), the green paint is most likely lead based so please take this in mind while working with it. Wear gloves and wash your hands frequently while working with it.
-boots
Just thinking ahead here, would like to use one of these to power 2/4 the primary of a second one with the other 2/4 of the primary run from the same exciting voltage as the first device, that way if I can get 90deg shift on first one I could create rotating primary field on the second device as per the converter idea of Tesla's.
-boots
To be honest, I read that a dozen times and I still have no clue what you meant ???
Dieter;
I suppose it was not a very thorough explanation, I was referring to re-winding the outer winding so that it was 4 separate balanced windings each taking up a quarter of the circle and powering it with 2phase driver circuit through a 2ch audio amp. There is an old thread where a former user named room3327 built such a driver cct and used it to drive a tesla converter build as per that 1888 tesla patent. The idea would be to create a rotating mag field around the device of continuous intensity minimizing the transformer action. I am using one of those large ferrite toroidal cores I pictured in my failed bitt experiment to build a test converter and already have the 2 phase phase shift cct built and adjusted for 90deg phase shift at 15khz to start. Depending on what I find with this experiment I will then determine whether or not to use such a rotating field setup for the primary of the above shown shield transformer. Actually I only need an audio amp to test it out, have all the balanced field windings already wound around the ferrite toroid.
-boots
Ok, I see. Sounds interesting. A car amplifer would make sense as it runs from 12 dc. Just a thought.
Regards
Have not had much time lately to experiment further with the prototypes but did do some calculations and found that it seems impossible to eliminate the transfo action when using 2ph sine waves as there was always amplitude variations when I mapped them in excel. Didnt matter what the phase shift was there was always amplitude variations. Thinking of using sequenced square waves instead to eliminate amplitude variations and maximize the rotating effect as per the descriptions in tesla patent. I have lots of that paddle wire now to build next version prototype just need some time to play around.
-boots
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CsagEYfxPgs
This link shows a similar idea but with new info on how we could power Gabriel up by adding a central connecting rod to the shells. Hope your still interested.
Quote from: Magluvin on April 15, 2014, 11:10:42 PM
Also, one of the key workings is the inner core of the secondary. When the primary flux level is able to penetrate the shield, that flux continues one to be attracted to the sec inner core, in which the flux induces current in the sec along the way. Then the sec flux, because it is carrying current now, is suppose to be mostly if not all attracted to the inner core and not affecting the primary like a normal transformer does. Once the inner core contains a combination of flux from bot the pri and sec, it has to be able to contain all that flux to avoid saturation. So the sec loading also need to be of a particular value also, 'for a particular build', so as to not produce to much flux as to bring the inner core close to or beyond saturation. Your inner core looks of good size to work with decent power levels. ;) Let the core be with you. ;D The thickness of the shielding, and material used, determines how much input needed to break through the shield to get to the inner core, as the shield needs a certain amount of input for the primary flux to saturate it. And any power input beyond that point of saturation(rising ac sine voltage and current in the primary) the additional flux beyond that point then passes through to the inner core. So thin shield, less input to get correct phase shift, and thick shield, more input to get the same phase shift. ;)
So first adjust your input for phase correction, then start adding load. Increase the load until there is a phase difference then back off on the load till phase is back to max shift and that will be the target input and output for your particular build. ;)
I have to look back and see, its been a while, but I believe you want your input limiter to be resistive(toaster). Not sure if a toaster has much inductance to affect the primary or circuit response overall much. That is a resistive limiter if not using a controllable ac input.
Mags
Hi Mags,
Just ran across your YouTube Videos, etc. this site, spent last 3 hours reading 70 pages here and wonder if you could give me the specs on that Ballast you use. Your 10 hz output mystifies me. Is it a standard or switching ballast?
Thanks,
Ben
Quote from: k4zep on August 08, 2015, 01:21:04 PM
Hi Mags,
Just ran across your YouTube Videos, etc. this site, spent last 3 hours reading 70 pages here and wonder if you could give me the specs on that Ballast you use. Your 10 hz output mystifies me. Is it a standard or switching ballast?
Thanks,
Ben
Hey Ben
Been out for a bit.
Which ballast are you referring to? Or vid?
Sorry didnt get back earlier. Busy.
Mags
Quote from: k4zep on August 08, 2015, 01:21:04 PM
Hi Mags,
Just ran across your YouTube Videos, etc. this site, spent last 3 hours reading 70 pages here and wonder if you could give me the specs on that Ballast you use. Your 10 hz output mystifies me. Is it a standard or switching ballast?
Thanks,
Ben
Did you mean the converter I used with the lasersaber motor? It was used with my Lil Tc also, but no vid on that.
If so, it is a product Radioshack has, maybe had now, used to run lighting electroluminescent strips they sold also. 2AA and 160v out loaded. If I remember it peaked above 230v unloaded or lighter loads. And using an inductive amplifier, thats what they call it, from a telephone system repair kit, you can hear the freq of the inverter/converter. So it is in the audible range.
Mags
Quote from: Magluvin on August 11, 2015, 09:15:19 PM
Did you mean the converter I used with the lasersaber motor? It was used with my Lil Tc also, but no vid on that.
If so, it is a product Radioshack has, maybe had now, used to run lighting electroluminescent strips they sold also. 2AA and 160v out loaded. If I remember it peaked above 230v unloaded or lighter loads. And using an inductive amplifier, thats what they call it, from a telephone system repair kit, you can hear the freq of the inverter/converter. So it is in the audible range.
Mags
In one of your videos, driving a Gabrial device, you used a Ballasts you called it. Put out about 800VAC into the input of the coil.............I think it was a switched florescent ballast.
Just wondering.
Oh yeah. That was what i used for the lil tc.
Been a while.
It is from an older printer/scanner that used a long thin neon tube in the scanner. It is about 1kv out. 12v and some may be 24v in. Have a few of them from salvaged scanners.
Mags
Which vid was it?
Mags
This one.
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/proxy/5O3Fho1QL2_Wfw3kFXqZFHXWMXzm_SqFmqhn62a0UbgxqnvngR53Hwb7-RGK-ZjFJEajTVbZqk21pW3tVtKszNopYEM=w346-h195-n
Hello, everyone!!
Power Companies CAN CHARGE us for using excessive REACTIVE POWER (resulted from low Power Factor devices).
https://www.npower.com/business/help-and-support/customer-information/reactive-power/
https://www.psoklahoma.com/info/news/ReactivePowerCharge.aspx
Do this mean that Bi-Toroid Transformer (by Thane Heins) and other similar OU devices will INCREASE our electric bill?
Here in Brazil, consuming excessive Reactive Power even represents penalty.
My intention on replicating BiTT (PF = zero) was for reducing my power billing, not opposite.
Reactive Power can not be measured by Wattmeter (kW), but Companies measure it by other way (kVAR).
Is there a way for overcome this? Or do I just misunderstood all those things?
New topic for this discussion:
http://overunity.com/15983/reactive-power-bill/msg459456/#msg459456
Quote from: leonardocunha on August 18, 2015, 06:54:23 PM
Hello, everyone!!
Power Companies CAN CHARGE us for using excessive REACTIVE POWER (resulted from low Power Factor devices).
https://www.npower.com/business/help-and-support/customer-information/reactive-power/ (https://www.npower.com/business/help-and-support/customer-information/reactive-power/)
https://www.psoklahoma.com/info/news/ReactivePowerCharge.aspx (https://www.psoklahoma.com/info/news/ReactivePowerCharge.aspx)
Do this mean that Bi-Toroid Transformer (by Thane Heins) and other similar OU devices will INCREASE our electric bill?
Here in Brazil, consuming excessive Reactive Power even represents penalty.
My intention on replicating BiTT (PF = zero) was for reducing my power billing, not opposite.
Reactive Power can not be measured by Wattmeter (kW), but Companies measure it by other way (kVAR).
Is there a way for overcome this? Or do I just misunderstood all those things?
New topic for this discussion:
http://overunity.com/15983/reactive-power-bill/msg459456/#msg459456 (http://overunity.com/15983/reactive-power-bill/msg459456/#msg459456)
If bit toroid divice or other realy have overunity, then you can run it on transistors and make selfrunning. And reactive power can be remowed with capasitors. Capasitors corects shits angle and remove reactive usage of power.
Quote from: Feynman on March 24, 2011, 12:33:39 PM
I don't know about a toaster... but I know this:
When a light bulb starts from cold, it has very low resistance. It can be as low as 16 Ohms!! So when it starts up the 'kick' (ala Steven Mark) shoots across the tungsten carrying alot of 'impulse' (voltage, current, and whatever else EMF is -really- comprised of). Then, as the light bulb starts to heat up , the resistance increases (and thus the current consumption decreases). I think a 60W light bulb will climb up to the vicinity of 500 Ohms to 2K Ohms after it heats up.
It's possible a toaster has a similar temperature dependent effect, so we'll need to consider this during any sort of modeling or calculations unless the toaster resistance is experimentally derived. I doubt it's fixed, (I think toaster has temp-dependent resistance), but I don't know for sure. I'm just basing this on the behavior of light bulbs.
Toster not have same efect like lamp. Toster almost not change resistance. Because it not products light, like lamp and it resistance is always almost same. It works wery close to resistor parameters.
Ok. lamp say can increse resistance 5 times. Toster can increse resistance 2 times.
If toster consuming at 120 volts of it nominal voltage 200 W, that means, that 200\120=1.6666 A. R=U\I=120\1.666=72 omh. So in 0.5 A let say it resistance 30 omh. So toster consumib power is. First U=IxR=0.5x30=15 V/ P =IxR=15x0.5=7.5 W. So primary consuming 120-15=105 V and 0.5 A, that is 52.5 W.
Quote from: the_big_m_in_ok on March 25, 2011, 01:26:33 PM
Rather than start a new thread, I'll just ask the question:
Can one's electric bill be lowereed by back-feeding the output of a Gabriel Fevice to a wall outlet? Either the same plug as the tap-off point, or, another plug on the same electrical circuit?
Thusly:
------------------------------------
| |
\ / /\
Outlet -----> Current Gabriel----
Limiter-----> Device
My thinking:
The sin wave wall current is always in phase,
and, the COP is supposed to be 8 or more.
Ultimate question, which I've never tried:
Can the hot and neutral leads of a wall plug be connected directly together if the whole power system is in phase?
If so, this should theoretically work? I have yet to try with full voltage from the wall, but I do have several transformers to step down voltage.
--Lee
Beter run on transistors and made self looop selfrunning. Posible use and invertor and charger to feed invertot, but then may need addd capasitor to primary to corect power factor, because maybe this divice use big reactive power and if not corect power factor, then power may not go to invertor back. Capasitor need chose, then is minimum amps is cunsumed. I guest for Gabriel divice capasitor value can be bettwen 2 and 20 mikrofarads 400 V. And at this stage power factor must be 1 or close to 1 (or 100 precents).
Quote from: SchubertReijiMaigo on October 24, 2011, 08:51:17 AM
Look like some bad news: :-[ according my red (power curve) Current*Voltage...
Look like my version is not OU anymore... But rather an energy destroyer... :o :o
Let's me explain, at the input side PF is nearly 1 and the output is 1, but if you look carefully the two curve look like it need 2.5 time energy :o :o to power a load, ie for one Watt at secondary you need 2.5 Watts (not VA)...
Question at 1 Yen here: What I have missed here !? It's crazy... ???
How to turn in OU state !? (Adding turns, because my turn ratio is under one so for any trun ratio above 1 it switch in OU state !? Crazy)
Or the current at secondary is not measurable by conventional meter (Cold or Radiant current) I think I become mad here...
First Graph is INPUT and second OUPUT:
You right. Power factor is near to 1 in this first picture. Now look red sine. Input and output. In input is much more power, than on output.
Quote from: Real Boots on April 15, 2014, 10:23:07 PM
Hooked up scope last night, very disappointed as i only get 10 deg phase angle between current and volts on input with 120w output at 120vac out into two 60w bulbs. Power calc gave 158w in with 120w out.
Tried to compare phase of input volts to output volts with same 120w load but it appears to be in phase or 180deg out depending on polarity I connect scope probe. Tesla patent mentioned phase shift but I am not seeing it at all, anybody know if tesla actually built the transfo described in the patent?
Perhaps if I could run it at 800hz or something phase shift would appear? Any ideas on this are appreciated.
-boots
Seems Gabriel divice not have overunity. It making curent pulses and then powermetter incorect show results. And were author of this divice show overunity 1:8? Why not any photos or videos, or explanation, that load he use, then get overunity 8?
Role of resonance in Gabriel device ?? Lenz's law is being bucked in this device.