Kapanadze and other FE discussion

[pix]

Flyback is not OU.
Then every transformer with a diode on the secondary would be OU device.

It doesn't matter that you need a very small current to fully magnetise  core. You do forget about opposite- you need the same small opposite current to cancel that magnetic flux once you connect load to secondary.
One thing you are omitting- magnetic energy is stored not in the ferromagnetic core, but in the air gap, localised or dispersed.
And once you introduce an air gap, your magnetising current is larger. And the same for opposite action.
Sorry, no OU there.
The only possibility to get COP >1 out of the flyback is when introducing air gap into the magnetic path and magnetising by use of permanent magnet. By switching alternative magnetic paths.
MEG would be a good candidate, I wrote about this few times already.
Place air gaps before switching coils and larger ones at the output coils, add diodes to make MEG a PM magnetised flyback.


Cheers,
pix

[pix]

I will give you that i did not take into account that power factor in the output is 0.2-0.4. so that pretty much dismisses the NST story.

As for Don, i also did watch all his presentations and interviews and i think his demonstration is legit altho not most transparent, i don't think he is fake, he just did not reveal all the details.

BTW Don Smith reported on a Yahoo group in 2006 that using 3 resonant Tesla pancakes
with 14 watt input he literally melted the diode bridge rated at 20,000V and 200A.

That's more than 4 Megawatts.

Nix



4 Megawatts 

[lancaIV]

To the given points technical publications "patent-application,non/"Patent" granted"

NST may or may not be OU but every flyback should be overunity for reason i shared before, magnetizing current which uses 1-5% of full load power creates full load potential energy flux in the core.

Power in a tranformer is proportional to flux times frequency (just like in the motor it is torque times velocity, same thing), which is why higher permeability corres can be smaller size, which is why airplane transformers use 400Hz also for smaller size.

https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=2&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=19910718&CC=DE&NR=4000592A1&KC=A1#

Flux is max in no load state - this is conventional wisdom.
https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=16&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=19860717&CC=DE&NR=3501076A1&KC=A1#

Transformer as a Constant Flux Device ( Transformer on LOAD )

https://www.myelectrical2015.com/2017/10/transformer-on-load.html

Transformer operation has been known for a long time, i already summarized it like this

And these

https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/71110/why-is-maximum-flux-attained-in-transformer-when-off-load
https://www.quora.com/Why-in-transformer-flux-remains-constant-no-load-to-full-load#:~:text=If%20you%20want%20a%20simple,the%20ferromagnetic%20material%20%2C%20the%20core%20
https://www.quora.com/Why-transformer-is-called-constant-flux-machine
https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/71110/why-is-maximum-flux-attained-in-transformer-when-off-load

Etc. So, it is firmly established flux in the core is maximum with no load. The fact that full load voltage appears on the secondary is enough proof that there is a full load flux in the core. If anyone still doubts that, the best method i envison is to get a transformer with an airgap and while plugged in unloaded put the AC gauss meter probe into the gap and you will see there is a maximum flux in there.

BTW loaded transformer does not hum louder cause flux in the core is larger but due to electromechanical vibration of windings due to leakage flux.

https://electrical-engineering-portal.com/sources-of-sound-in-transformers

It is a well known fact that power in a transformer is proportional to flux time frequency according to a known formula for voltage across transformer primary or secondary is

E = 4.44 * number of turns * frequency * flux in the core
https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=4&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=19761217&CC=FR&NR=2312135A1&KC=A1#
https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=17&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=19990720&CC=US&NR=5926083A&KC=A#
Is Heinrich Kunel f.e. 10 Ampere-coils energy converter the nominal Ampere output dividing /10 or x10 amplifying ?

But for flux in the core to appear there first has to be current through the coil

This flux is proportional to input voltage and inversely proportional to frequency

E/f

It should be clear to everyone that full load flux at operating frequency means full potential energy. So even without exotic cold electricity, strictly by convention flyback should be OU, there is absolutely no explanation how it cannot be, full load flux (and thus full load energy) is created with 5% of full load power or less.

Not to mention the modern core materials with permeability up to a million which means that magnetizing current is even smaller. That literally means miliamps can create flux that it would takes amps to generate with low perm cores, all 100% for free.

So high perm cores in flyback mode should especially be big OU. My suggestion to anyone who has a high perm core, try running it in flyback mode, use proper voltage and number of turns on the primary and frequency so that max flux is established but of course not saturation.

When that large flux which is created basically for free collapses it has no choice but to generate much larger power in the secondary.

Why is this effect not better known is strange, but there are many flyback/backemf OU reports already. I guess those who fail use too low perm core and not right number of primary turns and frequency.

Of course running a silicon steel core with pulsed DC is not advisable, it will saturate and short immediately (i tried). So it should be done with large ferrites or far better with exotic modern cores.

And another interesting thing, it is widely known that in any RLC tank current always first flows into the cap which seems like a short at first while inductor is like hitting a wall, but in Tesla pancake bifilar inductor IS a cap, wrap your mind around THAT.
https://worldwide.espacenet.com/searchResults?submitted=true&locale=en_EP&DB=EPODOC&ST=advanced&TI=&AB=&PN=&AP=&PR=&PD=&PA=Adam+lorek&IN=&CPC=&IC=&Submit=Search
https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=0&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=19220721&CC=FR&NR=540979A&KC=A#

[lancaIV]

Flyback is not OU.
Then every transformer with a diode on the secondary would be OU device.

It doesn't matter that you need a very small current to fully magnetise  core. You do forget about opposite- you need the same small opposite current to cancel that magnetic flux once you connect load to secondary.
One thing you are omitting- magnetic energy is stored not in the ferromagnetic core, but in the air gap, localised or dispersed.
And once you introduce an air gap, your magnetising current is larger. And the same for opposite action.
Sorry, no OU there.
The only possibility to get COP >1 out of the flyback is when introducing air gap into the magnetic path and magnetising by use of permanent magnet. By switching alternative magnetic paths.
MEG would be a good candidate, I wrote about this few times already.
Place air gaps before switching coils and larger ones at the output coils, add diodes to make MEG a PM magnetised flyback.


RLC tank circuit,parametric or resonant circuit ,rotative :
https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=4&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=19210709&CC=FR&NR=521330A&KC=A#

Cheers,
pix

[Sergh]

Have you checked something yourself? On YouTube, they saw how it spins, but did not notice the thin wires from the outlet?
Do you have measuring instruments besides eyes, fingers and screwdrivers? Is there sufficient education to make accurate electronic measurements?