Selfrunning Free Energy devices up to 5 KW from Tariel Kapanadze

[ronotte]

Hi all,

I’ll try now to share additional data I gathered trough measurements  (Fig1 test workbench) I have done now and in the beginning and thoughts after reading the very interesting comments coming from aether22, forest, alena, wattsup. I’m sorry if not following an ordinate path…

1 â€" The Caduceus coil. It seems that there still are understanding problems: same for me. Anyway it may be interesting to know  results of my initial measurements I did on the STAAAR team CC replica (their documentation very good, so I assume I did it exactly as suggested):

- Caduceus inductance @1KHz  L = 0.3uH (!!)
- Caduceus resistance @1KHz   R = 0.0 Ohm

Driving the Caduceus (Wavetek sin generator Z0=50 Ohm) with 1K resistor in series gives no resonance till at least the 20MHz Wavetek capability. Putting the Caduceus in the operating mode by inserting the Ferrite rods (4stick  x 0.9cm x 20cm) and using a tank cap = 800pf gives a perfect resonance at 3.54MHz. This is not coherent if using any TBC as source  but make sense if referred for example to my kacher tailored (1/4 wave) to work at 3.1MHz.

In practice, using the kacher @3.1MHz, the tank cap increased to 1.1n gives the max output amplitude. This cap does control the main system resonance so it is very important to optimize it for every replication.

2 â€" Pickup coil. I did it exactly like suggested and tried also to reach the much wanted 147pf. So I obtained:

-      Pickup coil  both halves) @ 1KHz  L =34.8uH
-      Pickup coil  both halves) @ 1KHz  R = 0.12 Ohm
-      Pickup coil / Caduceus capacitance = 127pf (!)

Note: so you see that Caduceus HAS his own well defined resonance  [/font]when inserted in the real circuit. The resonance effect is also evident as the Caduceus crossings are prone to spark even if isolated! This means that, at least in my case (using only sinusoidal 1.3KVpp from kacher), the crossings face a ddp of at least 5 -10KV hence there is a magnification or if you want a Q equal at least to 5. In order to obtain more capacitance it will be necessary to make use of thinner foil isolant like kapton.

3 â€" output spectrum measure. As suggested I did spectrum measure referring to Wesley ver#2 schematic and putting the scope’s probe near the pickup coil lead connected to D3 anode. The test workbench is in picture 1.

In Fig 2 you see in the upper trace the captured waveform (it is not synchronized…) and in the lower trace the amplitude spectrum (phase spectrum too much complex to extract any useful info). The sweep starts from 1.71MHz and goes up to 98.8MHz: I found this range containing the most important info. Over 100MHZ and till 4GHz all is almost flat. In 3  you see the output trumpet wave having 850Vpp. I note that this wave lacks of concavity so is much like to Romero’s finding...

It is different from what I’ve already reported about the output with Tesla pancake coil approach where the concavity is evident like in Fig 4.
So, in fig 2 (lower trace) you see that:

- F1 peak is @2.9 MHz corresponds to kacher output  (1st vertical ID bar on trace)
- F2 = peak is @7.1 MHZ corresponds to (2nd vertical ID bar on trace)

There are also significant (?) peaks in all the range (6, 10.9, 35, 42, 62 MHZ……probably harmonics generated by the spark gap SG1.
Concluding I do not think that caduceus is acting only as a capacitor plate! And also I did measures for my Tesla pancake approach and found that the bifilar primary has also his own resonation that I exploited to obtain the trumpet with concavity.
Good work (fun?) to all from

Roberto

[skaarj]

Look... it's LIGHT!!!
(later edit: a 40 Watts bulb full light, f*ck EU - stupid laws, no more 100W and 200W bulbs allowed for sale, they do not want any of us to experiment anything)

Now, if you look more carefully, you will see that the bulb is connected to the 220V socket in the wall, and not to the yoke. Because I did not manage to repeat your experiment, but I believe in you and your work and I do not want to give up.


I would like to make this happen for real, and not for a bad joke.


So Mr. Wesley, you have ignored my posts on this topic and I understand you are very busy, but now that I got your attention, please tell me - the secondary winding (150 turns, two wires together) - is it a CADUCEUS or a normal double wire winding?


I have all the equipment: 3 signals generators and the spectrum analyzer -  1xPCSU1000 and 3xPCGU1000. It has not been easy for me to buy them. I also have 4 yokes, as following:
first from left - from a Stassfurt T205 made around 1965 in germany;
second from left - from a Temp 7M
third (down side of picture) - from a Rubin 102
4th (right side) with windings - from some 21" video monitor.


I wrote the drivers and a program using Unix BSD, a little of C/C++ and many nights with no sleep,  to auto-tune two of the PCGU1000 to the frequencies where the voltage at the "two wire secondary coil" will be maximum, with the light connected. All possible combinations of amplitudes, wave forms, pre-defined and also from libraries, also for square the duty cycle was between 1% and 99%. All measured data was recorded in MySQL databases. The test was performed like this:


1. it took me 1 week (7 days) on the Rubin-102 yoke and 1 week on the 21" monitor yoke, with signals sent to the yokes via Field Effect Transistors. (later edit:) Electricity for transistors was +12V from a PC ATX power supply.


2. 1 week on the Rubin-102 and 1 week on the 21" yokes with DIRECT connection to the yokes.

Data was stored in around 300 MBytes of compressed MySQL database.

After 4 weeks I had all the data (frequency, wave form, amplitude).
Many combinations made a little light, but the most strong I managed to make on the Rubin-102 coil at 450Hz base frequency (50 turn coil) and at around 3700kHz on the modulating coil (15 turn) by using Field Effect Transistors, both signals SQUARE, both 50% duty cycles.


No sparks yet, I have to build some additional circuits, I am afraid to burn the generators - US$1500 is a lot of money for me. I want to repeat the 150 watt experiment, that one where you still did not discover the need for spark.


Please help.


Best wishes,


[skaarj]


Later edit - sorry, I do not want many posts with little things:  added one more picture with flyback transformers. From left:  Stassfurt T205 transformer, second: the old and strong TBC-110L (a new, unused one, some цигaHcKи tried to destroy it long time ago) and at right side - two Rubin-102 TBC-b.NIO.449001 from Rubin-102. I will have to try all of them.

[hartiberlin]

Hi Roberto,
how bright are your bulbs at what input power ?

Did you already do a video about your new experiments ?

Many thanks.

Regards, Stefan.

[hartiberlin]

Hi Ghazanfar_Ali,

how do you do the feedback circuit to run it
just on a charged capacitor ?

How does your coil look ?

Is the R1 your incand. bulb ?

I don´t see in your circuit how you could get the power back to the input...
Do you use an additional transformer in your setup to do this ?

I see in your measurements, that the input current from the input cap is bigger than the load
current, so where is the gain in your circuit ??

Regards, Stefan.

[wattsup]

I had to re-work this post several times because it was flying all over the place. Hmmmmm. It still is, but..... lol.

@ronotte and others

If you see the post from @Alena showing the diagram (111.JPG) in which he drew the red arrows showing "flow", this should be considered totally wrong. The action is much more complicated then that my friends. It is even possible that the OU already happened in the flyback and the spark gap is only a way to push it out of the flyback and into a bulb without loading the HV. TK even said it himself. The TK coil was used to condition the output. Conditioning the output is not the same thing as amplifying it? Well if the CC is not amplifying it, then were is it being amplified or transformed to a more efficient form? The CC could be the Caduceus or the Yoke, it does not matter. There as only transition methods.

Consider the regular TBC110 diagram where you have the HV+ at point #11 and the negative at point #10 that then goes to the SFC at point #9. So what is the polarity there between #10 and #9 when your HV output is AC requiring the AV plug rectification. Then consider the SFC is also being pulsed by the primary to produce its own AC output voltage that by itself could easilly be in the 1000v range. So what are the pulsed polarities then? Then consider the effect of having the HV- that is sharing that already well driven SFC. What effect all this has is definitely not a simple flow pattern. Also, this SFC action in tandem with the HV action cannot be artificially induced with an exterior coil because both have to share the same core halves.

So how can you get 3-5kHz spark pulse with an inherent riding frequency in the MHz range? Consider the action between the HV and SFC coils both having different wire lengths and both being impressed upon by the same primary off the same core halves, so the initial base pulse timing is always in sync. But then consider each of these two "entities" are feeding each side of the CC. HV+ to the CC and the SFC output being + or - (who knows) to the outer CC center tap. Nothing in this is standard coupling. Both the positive and the negative of the HV output are going out. None of that can go back in because it would destroy the flyback. I think that TK understood what I have been trying to explain on some other threads that energy flows in both directions and only when it hits a snag, does it reflect backwards. The load is the snag in most pulsing cases. But here we have the outputs are totally independent and do not see each other through any direct wiring. So the flyback cannot really see the load. Whammo.

But the one component that is always in the diagrams is the TBC110 and this is the one we have the least information on.

To Wesley and others, please I hope I am not getting across as someone that is ungrateful of everyone working as private individuals doing their utmost best to understand all this. The thing is this. If I was the R&D Project Manager in this particular case, I would have insisted that the question of flyback variables be undertaken at the initial stages to answer some very simple questions that have to this point not been answered and because of this lack of answers, we are moving along, well OK, but we are blind to some very important effects on the flyback level. If you are blind to the variables in effects of the primary level, then the rest of the sequence of forward moving is always covered with this thin veil of uncertainty. Already we have great forward strides but the most basic effect is still not understood and even not implemented by experimenters and even now with the diagrams always right in front of us, shouting out to us, "look at my HV- and where it is going", we are still acting like the SFC does not exist. In my humble opinion, this is not the right way to advance. If you may please remember many many pages back where I was always looking to reconcile the SFC in the modern day flybacks.

There are not that many rocks left to turn over once the trumpet waveform was replicated to make sure it was visible in the bulk of the set-up, and this has been accomplished by @ronotte as well as @romero (good work to both) so we now know the trumpet waveform is not the most critical effect to achieve. From what I can gather, the trumpet waveform can happen in many amperage flavors but there is one special flavor that will bring out the juicy taste of OU. lol But that flavor is not produced by the CC. It can only be generated by the flyback as the main voltage/amperage ingredient mixer.

So technically, the only real guys that can answer this are the people who have the TBC110 on their work bench. So in reality, for me there is only one question that really remains to be answered and the answer is so simple to test.

1) Remove the TBC110 HV- (#10) from going to the SFC (#9) and put it directly to the Center Tap of the CC.
2) Test the result.
3) If it still works just as it did before, please explain.
4) If it does not work properly without the SFC interfacing, please explain.
5) Then simply measure the resistance and inductance of the SFC and provide those values. There is much we can do with just that information alone.

Nothing in all this endeavor can be so simple and so revealing then the above. Once I know this one fact from the original, then I do not mind buying a nice fat ferrite and having a flyback custom wound to the TBC110 specs or close enough to do some more experimenting. I would make it with slightly thicker wires so the device would at least have a better chance of surviving.

Why am I so adamant. The flyback transformer (TBC110) is the workhorse of this device. But this workhorse is curiously running with very little feed (5 watts) and it is using this lower energy in such a way that we do not know the real importance of the relationship between the HV and the SFC. We are over-concentrating on the output at the CC. Look at all the videos we now see of guys lighting up their bulbs by inserting them like I have also made and posted a small coil to slip into the CC air core. All these guys are yelling out, "HEY, the coupling can be done in many ways", but that is not the OU part. The real OU part is in the flyback and as long as we feed our toys with direct brute force, of course them lights will go on, but look at the cost. No OU.

I can tell you this though and I have posted it before when I was doing the tests with my first standard dioded flybacks, I would send the HV- through one of the extra coils in the flyback and the impress on the CC was very different then what I see today with my present really great flyback. But this present one does not permit me to isolate an SFC since they are all connected internally as a multi-tap single coil. Actually, I have found no information anywhere on my flyback model FLY-295. But with the standard flybacks, I could actually feel this static like energy around the CC that I have not seen since. 

Try this. With your flyback or HV device pulsing, bring the positive to a grounded metal object and you will create a streamer. Then leave the positive and take the negative and do the same thing. You will again create a steamer. Either positive or negative leaving the HV, both are live and ready to bite. Now send the negative back into a SFC coil to meet the SFC's already produced voltage output that is being generated inside the SFC coil length and that could reach a good 1000 volts by itself. Now send that mixture to the CTCC. WTF man. This is extreme electron mixing/blending and I am sure this is the OU part. The CC is just another interface. One coil under two, two coils angled 45 or whatever degrees, one coil over three, ten coils over 100, who cares how the CC is made when you have such nice juicy and tasty + and - HV output.

The TBC110 wiring method is like an efficient toaster inside another toaster. Standard flybacks were not designed for such hardships. But anyone can try with  a regular flyback knowing that the user life will be limited but at least you can see the effect while it lasts. There is a good resource to find modern flyback wiring diagrams located further down. As long as the SFC is not internally connected to the HV side, even if it is in series with other coils, it will work. For how long, I cannot predict for you in advance because these modern flybacks use such thin wire (cost effectiveness) that they offer a very limited ability to deviate from their intended operational parameters.

Flyback reference resource......
http://www.donberg.ie/descript/h/hr_7898.htm
Just use the search field and enter your flyback model number.

wattsup

PS1: Sorry for long post again.
PS2: Also notice that in the original WNYg diagram, the SFC is actually a series of coils and one of them has a capacitor across it for additional res......... or whatever. This is the reality of the device as we saw it.
PS3: From the above, I suspect that the CC can be driven without the HV diodes and caps or even the spark gap but only if the Caduceus part is made into a real loop with just the one HV+ wire going to it. But this is for the next steps.