Bulgarian MEG

[rushi95]

Hi everyone,

I have a few doubts regarding the Bulgarian MEG(http://overunity.com/4300/a-truly-overunity-transformer-meg/msg134162/#msg134162). I am a novice in electromagnetics and any help would be appreciable.

1. In the bulgarian MEG, the toroid core needs to be saturated. The flux needed to saturate the core comes from the input power. Now the permanent magnet needs to have less flux than the maximum flux allowed in toroid core(otherwise PM will saturate the toroid itself). Does not that mean the output power is the same as what is required for saturation. For both input and output, the same amount of flux is linked. Can anyone correct me if I am wrong?

2. What happens when a load is connected to the output coil? To my knowledge, a reverse flux is produced by the output current. Since, there is no linkage between input and output, the net flux across the output decreases and as a result, lesser is the induced voltage. Is my understanding correct? If I am correct, then
- input power is increased with output power (when input and output are linked)
- Output voltage is reduced (when input and output are NOT linked)
Which is better in terms of efficiency?

[vasik041]

Hi rushi95,

I think your conclusions are correct.
Same power (not counting loses) required to modulate flux as will be available in the output.
While loading device, input power stays the same, but output voltage reduce.
I made several attempts replicate this setup and did not get OU.
From the history, it is known that magnetic amplifiers were replaced with electronics because of their low performance.
Of course, it could be that I missed something and you have a better luck

Regards,
-V.

[gyulasun]

Hi rushi95,

I think the toroidal core shape (which is to be saturated by the input) is only in the drawings for illustration and you see further drawing here for instance http://overunity.com/4300/a-truly-overunity-transformer-meg/msg134494/#msg134494  where the core to be saturated by the input is drawn to be rectangular and has three "legs" i.e. the flux from the permanent magnets enter into three branches of this core, this means the overall cross section area for the permanent magnets flux can be high enough not to cause saturation yet or cause only a partial saturation. When dealing with magnetic flux, cross section area of a magnetic core (or core volume) is important to consider.
This may mean, at least theoretically, that the flux from the permanent magnets could be let be higher than the flux created by the input power to cause saturation. In the above drawing there are three coils indicated to saturate the three legs (I assume the coils are meant in series connection).

On your 2nd question: yes a reverse flux should develop in the main core (normal Lenz effect) but this works against the flux coming from the permanent magnet. The inventor probably "solved" or reduced the ill effect of the decrease of the net flux by making the output coil or coils be resonant tank circuits at the appropiate frequency. I do not know how good such solution is though, sorry. Building a Bulgarian MEG setup has been on my to do list and I have not dealt with it.  I apologize from vasik041 if he did consider the importance of the cross section area for the input core I referred to above and yet he got underunity. 

I found two pictures in my old files, which were taken from the inventor's old website at least 10-12 years ago and shows a possible prototype he was building at the time in his laboratory. You can see rectangular core shapes made from normal laminated E and I cores that are used in 50 or 60 Hz mains transformers.
I attached the pictures in a zip file because their resolution (horizontal pixel number) would make this thread page very wide and problematic to read the long lines.

Gyula

[rushi95]

Hi Gyula,

Thanks for the reply. I have two basic doubts since I am not an expert in this field.

1."When dealing with magnetic flux, cross section area of a magnetic core (or core volume) is important to consider.
This may mean, at least theoretically, that the flux from the permanent magnets could be let be higher than the flux created by the input power to cause saturation." - I may not have understood this line properly. How does cross sectional area influence the flux?
Even if the flux is split into 3 cores - we will need to saturate all 3, correct? So, still input power would remain the same?
I am not getting the point you are making with the cross-sectional area.

2. Why the PM field should partially saturate the core? Any specific reason? Just had a thought in my mind - Lets say PM has almost saturated the core. Now, I only give a small amount of current to the coil, so that reluctance increases and PM flux needs to find a new path. But just as it finds the new path, flux in the core will again decrease and it will not be saturated. So, PM flux will again be redirected to the core. Can this be made to use?
Only issue is - dynamics of PM flux. If it takes some time for PM flux to reach steady state, then we can switch the input current faster than this time and never let it come to steady state. Did you understand my idea?

3. " The inventor probably "solved" or reduced the ill effect of the decrease of the net flux by making the output coil or coils be resonant tank circuits at the appropiate frequency. " - I do not get how a tank resonant circuit can solve the ill effect of decrease of net flux. Any link or thread on this topic will be helpful.

Sorry for some of the basic questions I have asked. I hope I am not wasting your time.