A truly overunity Transformer / Meg

[tao]

I did some FEMM sims for this device to show that the scheme devised in the picture below DOES work out...EXCEPT for one thing, the control coils shouldn't impose a circular(mutual) magnetization in the circular 'element', the sims where MUCH more favorable when the magnetization of each control coil opposed each other and opposed the flux coming from the permanent magnet...

I have appended two sims:
--one where the control coils ARE NOT ENERGIZED
--one where the control coils ARE ENERGIZED via 200turns of 22awg copper wire @ 2 amps for each coil (this can be in a pulse form, doesn't need be continuously applied (for those that don't know) )

I tried sims with the control coil 'element' in a circular format, but that didn't work very well, the flux didn't flow through it well enough so I went with the rectangular 'element'...

[gyulasun]

Hmm yes although is might fall in the MEG category this device is much different. Input and output are cleverly separated. It is the magnet that does the 'work' and the input coil that does the gating. But the input coil flux does not seem to interact with the output coil. He also states that this is a main reason why the meg and alike systems will not work, I'm not super sure why that would be 'that' important?
Plus special stuff like metglass is not needed he says.

Steven

Hello Steven,

The MEG and similar setups like Bearden et al in their patent or Naudin showed are normal transformers with primary (input) and secondary (output) windings  on a common ferromagnetic core, except for a permanent magnet in the middle column.  So if you remove the magnet, and start exciting the input coils, their setup readily continue working as a normal transformer because all the coils share a common flux path just like in a normal transformer,  the magnet does nothing else but shift the working area in the B-H curve of the core. And if you study the Megbuilders yahoo group, several members replicated this kind of MEG during the years and NONE of them showed extra output!  Only the Bearden team and Naudin alone claimed overunity.

In this Bulgarian type MEG, if you remove the magnet, the setup cannot readily work as a normal tranformer because the reasons you also wrote above.  So the input coils magnetic flux does not interact with the output coils flux, hence the output load cannot readily reflect in the input coils. 

I understand that a common flux path that is shared by both the input and output coils is NOT neccessarily a drawback in achieving overunity in a so called overunity setup  BUT in the normal MEG setup this seems to be a problem in practice: no overunity comes out in the replicators' MEG devices.  Years ago I also replicated the MEG and got a decent 87% efficiency (COP of 0.87). 
It is possible that Bearden at al have been hiding some important details but if there is any secret, then they have been sitting on it for at least a decade now and one wonders what are they waiting for to mass produce (or at least demonstrate) their claimed kW versions???  My only logical deduction is: their shown setup does not produce extra output and they have no secret....

rgds,  Gyula

[Nali2001]

Hi there Tao:
Thanks for the input.
One ting that must be kept in mind in these type of arrangements is the dimensions of the core sections of the circular core type of gate that they use very much depends on the fact that the total flux from the magnet can at rest only pass trough when it balances equally trough the two arms of the circular section. Plus one must note that this  'gate' will act very much as a resistor when powered. The circular section will have to be driven to saturation. The mean reason why it did not really work for you is because of your air gap size. In my opinion a 0.1 > 0.2mm air gap is all that is needed to create at rest the reluctance imbalance needed. See the attached simulations. And I agree with you, when the coils on the circular section are repelling you indeed end op with a more 'forcing' effect. But I have indeed found (just like the Bulgarian inventor) that this type of approach will not work as you would hope for some reason. Likely because in that situation the input flux will 'interact' with the output coil directly.

Hello Gyula:
Yes there indeed seem to be no real indisputable Bearden Meg replication out there. This is in my opinion mainly because a lot of people do not realize that the Bearden Meg does not quite work as one would think. What most of the time is explained as the workings behind the Meg, is flux density shifting from side to side. But although that 'might' happen Bearden himself does not describe that as the overunity enabling factor. In the video Energy from the vacuum he describes this more fully than I can, but the workings  depend on the Aharonov bohm effect. Now here is what I can remember about it. There is supposed to be this field about magnets that can normally not be reached due to the overpowering magnetic field of the magnet. What the core material of the meg is supposed to do is contain all the magnetism of the magnet itself in the core to a very high degree. Now that the magnetic field is fully contained it is said to possible to tap this 'special' (don't know the name) field. But like he says in the video, doing that is very hard and you need special knowledge and circuitry to sort it all out. He also says that he and his team are still looking for Aharonov bohm effect specialists to help them sort the problem areas out. So form what I get is that the Meg is not at all so simple as directing flux for left to right. That is why this Bulgarian 'Meg' seems so much more doable.
No Metglass not multi kilo hz.

Kind regards,
Steven

[exnihiloest]

...See the attached photo's (Or the one on their page) they have these 'toroid' (close looped) input core sections which will function as a 'magnetic resistor' once magnetized/saturated. And so the flux form the magnet will have to find another way around. ...

Why do you think so? If the current flows the same direction in the two control coils, it provides a circulary flux in the toroidal core as showed on the picture. But the flux from the magnet just adds in one branch of the toroid core and substracts in the other one. If we suppose the core is not saturated, we are in a linear domain so we just get a superposition of the magnetics fields and flux from coils and magnets. This can't change the flux in the output coil.

For changing the flux in the output coil, either the flux from the two control coils have to oppose each other or the toroidal core must be saturated.
In the first case the flux from each control coil will add together through the main circuit and superpose to that of the magnet thus the varying flux in the output coil will be only that of the control coils.
In the second case it is not possible to saturate equally the two branches of the toroid core because the flux is not the same (coil flux + magnet flux in a branch, coil flux - magnet flux in the other). But imagine we could. In order to saturate the core we will have to generate a flux at least superior to that of the magnet thus needing more energy than that being providing by the redirected flux of the magnet through the output coil.

It is a common error to not think about flux and fields as "superposition" although we deal with linear domains.  And to saturate core is wasting energy. No FE this way :-(

Fran?ois

[bluedemon]

Here is an idea using the same concept.  I was thinking at the time that it could be used in a motor or used something like a battery for magnetic circuits.

http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,1504.msg12125.html#msg12125