NRamaswami:


All you need is to power one 7 watt cfl light bulb in a self sustaining way.
That would galvanize the entire overunity community in a flash.
You don't need to spend lots of money.
Just show us a self runner.
No need for any measurements at all.

With the winding of the secondary under the primary thing. I think that will increase the coupling of the primary to secondary and the load on the secondary will reflect to the primary just as in any other transformer.

Here is a document just to get folks up to speed on how a transformer works. http://sound.westhost.com/xfmr.htm

If you're not already a  transformer expert and you don't read the document linked above a few times then there is only one person to blame.  Anyone professing to be an expert that says anything that goes against that document, they get no ear from me.

QuoteAt no load, an ideal transformer draws virtually no current from the mains, since it is simply a large inductance. The whole principle of operation is based on induced magnetic flux, which not only creates a voltage (and current) in the secondary, but the primary as well!  It is this characteristic that allows any inductor to function as expected, and the voltage generated in the primary is called a 'back EMF' (electromotive force). The magnitude of this voltage is such that it almost equals (and is effectively in the same phase as) the applied EMF.

Good luck.
Cheers

Hi All:

I saw Farmhand's posts about a book..I don't go by books.. I go by my experimental results. I have not seen any book that says you need a particular voltage:amperage ratio for the secondary to start functioning effectively. We found out from experience.  What we share are the experimental results. Not abcd is stated in xyz book..I'm not an Electrical Engineer and I do not understand the page long calculations and so I ignore them all and trust my experimental results and then move on from there to do other experiments.

I agreed with newton II and also informed that we lost nearly 100 fuzes..So you well know that we have done a lot of work.

We will present the experimental results.. If they are not greater output than input also we will put it here..When I have the honesty to say all this what is my problem? I have no problem.. Really not worried if One member will not give me an ear..I am least bothered really if one member will not listen to me.. Experimental results that any one can replicate will be posted..

And I have asked how many of you have converted an iron to a permanent magnet and I have not received an answer. That is kept a secret.

So I do not care about much of other books. I do not care about what abcd theory says or xyz says.. All I care to see is what is the experimental results. Does it makes common sense? Can we go further without taking risks..

I will devise a safe method to test the high voltage output step down by a transformer and then giving it to a load by putting about 100 x 200 watts bulbs in parallel and keeping all of them on. give power to the primary to induce the secondary and then the step down transformer. Let us wait and see what the voltmeter and Ammeter show on the load. We will then know what happens.. What is the output wattage and what is the input wattage.. We will then see.. Do I have any thing to lose if I say look what we have got is less than the input..Nothing..

Do I have any thing to gain by saying look what I have got is more than the input. Again nothing..

I share the results with the community.. Nothing more and Nothing less. Will it change the world. I do not know and I do not think so..For I have got only two people indicating that they would attempt to replicate the experiments. And NewtonII who appears to be very experienced felt that the flux would be additive in the central core which is what should happen as that portion uses the forces of magnetic attraction.

The problem is all of you have studied theories and machines that use only forces of magnetic repulsion.

Figuera advocated a totally more efficient concept of using forces of magnetic repulsion and magnetic attraction combined to get a greater outpt than the input. If one module does not produce the results, we need to give the output of first module to the second and so on. All this increases the input voltage:amperage ratio. This is why I clearly mentioned at fixed low frequency of 50 hz, if you want to get better results increased the input voltage:amperage ratio but the amperage should be reasonbly ok, in the 5 to 10 amps range for magnetism to be effective. I have given all information..And I have said that larger the core size, longer the core and longer the number of wires and higher the number of turns all these things work..

Check Magnetic field strength in any book.. It would say Magnetic field strength = Number of Amperes x Number of turns.. Is there any mention of the need for higher voltage there..

Look at the inductor capacitor theory: As the magnetic field collapses, the electric field increases..As the electric field collapses the magnetic field increses..What does that mean.. A low magnetic field that can create high induced emf will result in a high electric field..This is borne out by our experiments. But if you give milliamps and 100,000 volts you would not see any results.. Input amps must be adequate to create a reasonable amount of magnetism, a low level magnetism to produce electric field.

Have you bought and open a bottle dynamo used in bicycles.. See that the magnet that rotates in dynamos is of very low magnetic strength. That is desired to produced current..

Any way I think we can build a self sustaining generator and give it a one shot electric current and make it continuously produce electric current. Then I will provide the full construction methods and why it works and how it works..That is if It works as I anticipate now. Many of my anticipations have been knocked out by experimental results and so I go only by experimental results..

NRamaswami
This setup I saw many times and even tried to replicate BUT it was always on one core, that's why I always failed. I believe this is big step forward because of gaps between cores, but how big they are ?
Could someone more well-read confirm my feeling ? It's about EMF (electromagnetic force) created when magnetic field changes. The same is acting in Rhumkorff coil I believe. Now... if two primaries generate EMFs in secondaries and they  match and add ! , while EMFs generated by any change in magnetic field (by load) in secondaries to the primaries will nullify (being equal and opposite) then we have  lenz-free setup. In such setup the max output is dependent probably on factors like magnetizing current flowing in primary and the saturation point of cores. I believe that is purely Hubbard design, he looped it back to itself , has given the initial big current pulse and it worked indefinitely near the point of saturation of cores. That would be very good and limit the maximum output voltage, however itis only a theory...According to newspapers he used also two additional windings, one probably on the center core and one around all others. The one outside (if existed) reminds me Steven Mark control coil which safetly limited the rising of voltage on output and the one in center I have a feeling was somehow related to the method of starting device. maybe all transformers primaries were in series and that one in center was the middle and used to start-up by initial current impulse ?

Hi Forest:

Air gaps were present. How big they are -  I have not measured nor bothered.

and whether they have any effect. - I do not know.

What is Steven Mark control coil  - Can you post information and pictures on that..Would be obliged.

Hubbard design - I'm working on it. When it starts working I will post pictures and how to construct etc..