Overunity.com Archives is Temporarily on Read Mode Only!



Free Energy will change the World - Free Energy will stop Climate Change - Free Energy will give us hope
and we will not surrender until free energy will be enabled all over the world, to power planes, cars, ships and trains.
Free energy will help the poor to become independent of needing expensive fuels.
So all in all Free energy will bring far more peace to the world than any other invention has already brought to the world.
Those beautiful words were written by Stefan Hartmann/Owner/Admin at overunity.com
Unfortunately now, Stefan Hartmann is very ill and He needs our help
Stefan wanted that I have all these massive data to get it back online
even being as ill as Stefan is, he transferred all databases and folders
that without his help, this Forum Archives would have never been published here
so, please, as the Webmaster and Creator of these Archives, I am asking that you help him
by making a donation on the Paypal Button above.
You can visit us or register at my main site at:
Overunity Machines Forum



COP 20.00 (2000%) Times, Reactive Power Energy Source Generator,

Started by synchro1, May 07, 2014, 01:25:54 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.

picowatt

Quote from: hartiberlin on July 11, 2014, 09:36:06 AM
Well Seamonkey and Farmhand you are both wrong.

Have again a look at this below picture.

Look at the lower RED MATH traces.

THESE ARE POWER WAVEFORMS where above the groundline
areas mean positive input power and below the groundline means
negative input power, that means returning power to the
grid !

Left scopeshot shows the grid input ( here labled: Transformer output power)
You clearly see a sinus like wave
so  power is delivered to the circuit, BUT also almost the same amount of power again returned to the grid,
so the average input power is only 1.1 Watts !

At the right scopeshot you see the Math trace only above the groundline,
meaning, that at the lamp only positive real active power is lighting up the lamps.

I guess Seamonkey and Farmhand  should wait with further postings, until a block circuit diagramm
is posted, so further antipostings without discussing the switching technology behind it
are considdered as Trolling....

Regards, Stefan.

Has anyone seen any power measurements taken directly at the line input?

In the OP video, as they adjust the Variac, the voltage reading on the meter used to read the power to/from the line varies.  This indicates that the line input power, at the least, is being measured after the variac (even though the demonstrator in the video states what is being indicated is line input power).

In the image posted above with the two scope captures, the input power capture is labeled "transformer output".  The voltage trace is omitted on the "transformer output" capture, and cannot be assumed to be line voltage (in the OP video, there is a large power transformer near the load resistor).  It is possible that, as in the OP video, the input power is being measured after the Variac and/or transformer output, and again, not directly at the line input.

The point is, I have not seen any data that directly shows the line input power (not even a simple kill-a-watt).  Possibly I have just not seen it.  If line input data has been posted, could someone please direct me to it?

Thanks,

PW

SeaMonkey

Without reference to the input AC Wave
it is rather difficult to interpret the
depiction of the scope displays.

In any case, attaching a device to the grid
which extracts many times more power from
the grid than would be registered on the
Power Meter would appear, to the power
provider, to be theft of service.

If the device, when attached to a portable
generator, does indeed deliver more power
to a load than is actually provided by the
generator and without loading the generator
then it may have merit.

Any surplus power provided to the load must
come from somewhere;  from some phenomenon
which can be easily understood.  Reactive Power
is not an answer.

bugler

Quote from: synchro1 on May 07, 2014, 06:44:54 PM
Anyway, here is the reality as I see it:  Aaron's clip is nothing more than a cynical ploy to sell more tickets so that he can hit his $70K target. 
Aaron is a dishonest person. Just look at the ASEA scam he is supporting.




Farmhand

There is a lot to be said for "credibility" and Aaron has none in my view. Time and time again he shows his true colors, which is
money money money. Eric Dollard bad mouthed Aaron and Peter and John Bedini vehemently claiming they were fraudsters.
Now he sits at the bench with them. Why, Money.

We ought to be able to consider peoples claims based on "credibility", people who continually make false and silly claims don't have it.
People who may not be highly trained but are honest and have life experience a plenty can see easily when people that have no
credibility are making a bogus claim.

I don't think I've been wrong about a scam job yet. At least no one that has claimed OU that I have asked for better evidence
can produce any legitimate results.

The wave forms could be produced any old how, I noticed the Transformer output power shot was missing a trace but chose not to
dwell on that as I was unsure as to why. SeaMonkey cleared that up. I don't miss much, and I've lived around deceptive people
for so long in my life i can pick a scammer in seconds. A skill that helps a lot in real life.

It's difficult to believe anything said by a man who claims a bouncing ball is OU, it's just as difficult to believe his associates when
they don't correct him on it, because that indicates they are prepared to allow lies in the name of money or they also believe
a bouncing ball is OU. Either way it harms the credibility of all his associates. Thick as thieves, lay with the dog you get fleas
kind of thing.

I would not be hanging waiting for a schematic from them on this device, I would look to the patent and only one that is granted.
If they give a schematic how can we even know the schematic is the same as the device ?

The Shimada guy has a patent on this kind of tech., I would bet they are simply copying his principals but with a slightly different
switching scheme, different enough to patent maybe or maybe not, many people lodge patent applications just to get some
street credibility, it works for some too, at least for a time with some people.

I did post the Shimada paper here didn't I, that contains a lot of relevant info on the principal and some switching schemes.
That's a technical contribution to the discussion. But no discussion on that.

..

SeaMonkey

While I was at Mobile Technical Unit 7, U.S. Naval Station,
Yokosuka, Japan, in the 70s, I repaired our AC Voltage Stabilizer
Unit which functioned much as the device Shimada patented.

The device we used was the Ferro-Resonant version with SCRs
to accomplish the switching.

It was intended for use with 60 Hz power but someone inadvertently
connected it to the 50 Hz Japanese grid power and blew the SCRs.

We did have a small 60 Hz distribution system in our shop where
all receptacles were clearly marked as either 60 Hz / 120 Volts or
50 Hz / 100 Volts.  Apparently, one of our technical representatives
was not aware that the device was frequency sensitive or accidentally
plugged it in to the wrong receptacle momentarily.  That was all it took
to render it in need of repair.

The device weighed about 50 pounds and was capable of 1 Kilowatt
output of Voltage Stabilized 60 Hz AC.