increasing bemf with PMs

[dieter]

Permanent-Magnet-enhanced BackEMF Harvester


2017 by Dieter Marfurt.


I want to share with you this interesting circuit, that from my point of view has some strange
features.


Basicly a 555 chip is used to deliver a squarewave short duty signal at around 1 kHz. Pin 5 is used for
frequency adjustment over a potentiometer. The relation of the two resistors (now 3k and 50k) define the
mark/space or duty ratio. The 10nF cap sets the basic frequency.


Pin 3 Output Signal is fed into Base of a darlington transistor, the actual circuit presented here is between the
transistors collector and 9VDC+:


A pulse opens the transistor. Current flows over a resistor, then trough a LED or diode into the coil. The pulse ends
and the BEMF is trapped between two diodes / LEDs. With two further diodes the Potential diffrence between the coil
(during BEMF) and the positive pole of the 9vdc battery becomes more than twice the battery voltage (eg.:
Voltage at "LOAD" is 18vdc when battery is at 7.7vdc). Note that the battery's plus pole becomes the negative pole
during the BEMF. Current flows from the coil to the battery plus pole.


Any current that flows back to plus is free lunch. In case of a simple battery, as long as electrons don't reach
the minus pole of it, there is no ion exchange in the membrane and therefor the battery is not drained.


The pulse should just load the coil and then end. If the pulse is too long, energy is wasted.


The 555 chip consumes 10 milliamps when idle, that's a lot, but a cmos 555 could be used, with about a 1000th idle
consumption. However, in the following calculation the current consumed by the 555 is simply ignored.


This is just a rough estimation and I'm probably just revealing that I don't know anyhing about coils ^^, :


After a lot of tests, measurements and calculations there appeared some inconsistence between the numbers,
so I simplified measurement:


The Battery ran at about 7.4vdc. I seperated the supply rail of the 555 circuit and the rest.
The 555 alone used 7.8mA. The entire circuit used 7.9mA whith no load at "LOAD". When shortening "LOAD",
the current draw at the battery dropped to 7.85mA.


The battery was at about 7.7vdc
A 500 ohm Resistor reduces this to 14.4 mA


The coil has a dc resistance of 1.6k. The average resistance during a
pulse is estimated at 0.8k.


The total average resistance during a pulse is therefor 1.3k, giving 5.9 mA at 7.7vdc.
This is 45.6 mW, but as the duty is only 5%, theoreticly we get 2.25 mW Input.


However, current between transistor emitter and battery minus is 5.8mA constantly. A lot of this seems to come
from the 555 over the base, that has about 5mA at 5V by its own, when high.




On the BEMF circuit side the following values were found in the experiment:
Measured with digital multimeter, most likely containing a capacitor to get average dc samples.
13 VDC, 0.3mA. This is a constant output. Therefor, the output is 3.9 mW, giving a theoretical COP of 1.73.


So here theory and measurements don't fit. One could just toss it due to the high current over the emitter,
but I think there may be more to it.


Certain strange observations were made:


When I shortened the "LOAD", the LEDs became double as bright, but the Voltage at the battery poles did not rise.
Yet it must have increased, as the VCO-controlled frequency (at pin 5 of the 555) chanched significantly.
Additionally, the BEMF Voltage, measured without a load, reacted sensitive to human body contact I was able to
increase the voltage by 4vdc when squeezing the contacts between fingers. Interestingly this was not simple
"phantom" voltage with zero Amps, but 0.3mA, or 1.33 mW from me as an antenna. This may seem feeble, yet it is
extraordinary. It seems almost, as if the BEMF is capable of pulling in "ambient potential".


As you can see in the diagram, there are strong PMs at the ends of the core of the coil. Removing them reduced
the voltage of the BEMF (as described) to abuot 30%.


I did a similar experiment a few years ago, but back then I used a stepdown transformer as the power source. While the
PMs indeed increased the output, by means of inductive coupling the power consumption of the transformer also
increased. This is why a non-inductive power source should be used for this experiment.


to be continued

[Bat1Robin2]

Your first mistake is your input measurement. When a coil is pulsed it will have an inrush current during the charging initiation period this is where most of the energy is used to charge the magnetic field and will not be measured by any regular meter as the spike will not even be seen. The only way to be sure your getting 1.7 overunity extra energy is to loop it and remove the battery. (Thats not happening) The output voltage is irrelevant because any coil that is charged with a magnetic field will go to whatever voltage it needs to go to deliver its joules when the circuit goes open. It must dump its energy someplace because the energy cannot be destroyed so when you open the circuit it will find the weakest path.
The second strange event from the addition of magnets:  The magnets can only add or subtract to the magnetic storage capability of the core depending on there orientation compared to the charging polarity. If oriented correctly to increase the storage of the iron core the inrush current will increase and not be noticed. if oriented wrong they will have the core pre saturated in the same polarity as the inrush and decrease the storage.
Its like going out to eat when you have already have eaten vs going out to eat when you have starved for 3 days. The energy storage of the iron core is like a spring. The magnetic field bends the spring and then gets released there is no way a spring will ever deliver more than it was engaged with even if you have pre existing extra tension on it.  Only 2 fields of the universe Electric and Magnetic combine them in a packet you have a photon. The photons make 5 stable shells (mass). The core of the shells generate the gravity drawing all photons towards it like a tornado draws all air. The shells can get locked into chains this is strong force. Joining shells is fusion. Separating shells is fission. When shells deconstruct they add to the photonic pressure expanding the universe. When shells form or condense into matter they are  causing contraction of the universe. Shell 123 = proton Shell 1234 = nuetron  shell 5 = electron. Shell 5 is the largest  but softest and least energy. Shell 1 is the smallest but hardest most energy. See shell theory for more information. The universe is expanding ever faster due to the constant conversion of mass to photons of all the stars and the increasing number of stars. Large unstable shell combinations can snap free like an unstable mouse trap, this is the weak force. So i covered the problems of the circuit and covered the 5 fundamental forces of the universe. And explained the 2 fields that make it all happen. Its all connected the big to the small you have a circuit there that is equivalent to setting a mouse trap and letting it hit your finger and thinking it was more pressure than you ever put in. Then you added an extra spring and said look its even stronger now. But you still need the battery to reset it each cycle, hmmm.

[Zephir]

IMO the recycling of energy from BEMF of coil could work, but its saturation during charging must remain lower than during discharging. Try to check my last comments in the thread about Nelson Rocha's parametric oscillator for more explanation. The premagnetization of coil core is thus a good idea, but IMO common iron dissipates way too much waste heat during changes of its magnetization (induction heater principle). Try to replace it with soft ferrite or iron dust core  + magnet combination. The oscillograms of voltage and current at the coil during pulse would enable us to guess better, what's going on there. BTW The iron core can be source of its own energy during fast pulses due to nuclear isomerization - try to check this thread, for example (Meyer/Mace's generator).

When shortening "LOAD", the current draw at the battery dropped to 7.85mA.

But the actual reason can be, you eliminated voltage/magnetic pulse at the coil in this way, so that the remagnetization and power loses of core also decreased. Once these loses contributed to the draw of battery, then the current draw of loaded circuit may actually decrease instead of decrease. Such an circuit exhibits negative differential impedance - but this is normal for many nonlinear circuits involving oscillators etc. For example, once we short the plasma discharge, we'll interrupt it in this way (the voltage at neon lamp will fall bellow its ignition voltage) - so that the current draw of circuit also fall down, but no sign of overunity will be actually reached - just the circuit will not work well anymore. The replacement of iron core with magnetically soft material may help you to localize this source of misunderstanding too.

In overunity experiments the current load of batter means nothing, once you don't check the actual loses of circuit in its unloaded state. Only the careful power measurements involving power factor - or even better self-looped regime without external battery is what counts here.

[dieter]

I tried it with aircore, and indeed, it works much better.


That being said, i started this thread mainly to help keeping the forum alive. I would never have expected that this very thread serves as the revelation of tommorrows standard theory ^^ Maybe the nobel commitee was busy.