Selfrunning Free Energy devices up to 5 KW from Tariel Kapanadze

[Khwartz]

@Ronotte
Hi! You didn't answer to one of my post: Reply #10327 on: January 28, 2012, 02:21:17 PM, was it intentional? 
Regards.

[Acca]

Now this is a real fantastic coil.. clip

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BXKBtYn4Kws&list=UUo4TZccCL4Y6reMBGJSl0NQ&index=1&feature=plcp

[stivep]

What happened to the "working OU" device? 
Not working anymore? What a shame:'(.


It has been replicated in New York. Ha Ha

lough does not cost money
But our work cost money time attention 
do you see that mr a. king?








For those who do not understand why there is transition from one schematic  to another.
by the group
Aidas
Arunas
Wesley


When Aidas is working on another concept
Arunas and Wesley take previous one  into  the testing bench.


Main goal is to understand first.




We do not know what  gain of energy is coming from
We do not know why TK device work without any external power supply.

By the fact of applying different schematics and gaining results we have a chance to
-compare them
- analyze similarities
-mark differentiates
-get to logic conclusions


There is no one way to Washington
There are plenty.
There is no one OU device concepts
There are plenty.


There are many ways but only one unique mechanism ruling coupling energy of steady state Tesla based devices that is  common to all group of Tesla based devices

We try to find that mechanism
that  is why we have so many approaches


There is no magic device. It is only device that we do not understand why it works.



One of the main focuses of mine is spark gap by itself.That is why I try to attract    the group with new approach
Arunas than is taking concept into the drowing table
Than group together is scrutinizing the the schematic made by Arunas.


My Letter to John my friend from scientifically oriented group  of traditional science
who is supporting that all and closely watching group progress.




From Wesley to John


"The large time jitter originates from the stochastic processes
that cause the actual breakdown of the spark gap: When an electric field is applied over
a gap, at some point in time a free electron will be created (due to (cosmic) background
radiation). This free electron is accelerated by the applied electric field, gains energy and,
eventually, hits an atom. When the energy of the accelerated electron is high enough,
this atom will be ionized and another free electron is created. The two electrons will be
accelerated again, additional ionization will take place and this way an electron avalanche
in created. Finally, via this avalanche and the additional process of streamer formation a
conducting (arc) channel will be formed, spanning the complete gap between the electrodes
(a streamer is a narrow filamentary plasma, driven by highly non-linear space charge waves
This breakdown process is a stochastic process. The creation of the first free electrons
is stochastic and also the electron avalanche-formation has a stochastic nature, causing the
large shot-to-shot time instability and also limiting the rise time of the switched pulse





Theory of how TK device works. 


Take spark gap that is made from two contacts and is placed in our example  horizontally

Lets say that :Spark is jumping from left to right
Lets assume that when cosmic ray strike an electron it ads to total  energy by coupling energy of an electron.
Lets say that after all of the losses we are still dealing with little more additive energy level at the right side of the spark gap than we delivered to the left hand side.
Lets say that we  tuned spark gap to its own self resonance frequency
Lets say that in spectral view, there is certain significant presence of amplitude level that represents mentioned above occupying narrow bandwidth. That would manifest  self resonance frequency of a spark gap.   




The theory of mine is
- that in spark gap we are dealing with slow down of transition of energy ,that has addition of cosmic rays  than we try to deliver summary of the charge  after spark jumps back to the left hand side of spark gap.
Despite the losses  energy return is faster than energy transfer  at the spark gap.
-difference in speed travel of electrons in plasma and in copper.
Now we dealing with self-looping circuitry.
Each loop time period gives us more energy going to infinite number up.
Infinite number is energy without limitation but chopped by spark gap self resonance frequency
Right before  very maximum of the amplitude of the signal  from  right  hand side of spark gap
the impulse is than  caught   part of the access energy is delivered to the load ( light bulb)
The rest of the signal  is returned to the left hand side of spark gap
That rest  of the signal = energy needed to sustain oscillation.


The trumpet waveform is significant  to energy grow on the right hand side of spark gap.
If there was  element of device that could allow to do not interrupt trumpet that energy will grow infinitely .
That is the spark gap plasma transition delta T that is interrupting trumpet   

The frequency of oscillation is tuned to frequency of spark gap by itself.



For one who may analyze energy level of the cosmic ray as additive:
-Does not matter what is energy of cosmic ray as we do not know how many cosmic rays and at what interval i time  is striking electron / plasma of spark gap
example.
water is flowing into a container at steady speed= delta T
with the time,  potential energy in the container is accumulated 
I once released it represents say 100% of energy accumulated  from the water flow.
( minus energy losses due to the friction)
But we utilize only part of that  energy for our needs.


and we have constant water  flowing into a container at steady speed= delta T  all the time any time.
The speed of that flow is the factor determining potential energy level in container
The faster the speed  of flow the faster  container gain its potential energy.


Lets take this to three-dimensional  geometrical  platform
once electrical filed, and magnetically created field  expands more surface is available for cosmic ray to strike and add energy to energy of  plasma.


And lets assume that  cosmic ray energy is in phase  and reacts as pure additive to overall energy level.

conclusion #1


There is conservation of energy laws obeyed
There is only mechanism of ENERGY COUPLING PROCESS
That energy is free of charge by oil guys.



conclusion # 2
what ever mechanism or theory we take to analyze what this energy  is coming from
energy is coming from somewhere and is utilized by TK device or any device that uses the same mechanism.


final conclusion= summary of conclusions
there are many concepts but only  one mechanism of coupling.


As Dick said Spark gap does not care about signal carried on (say radar TX signal)
Spark gap works with its own frequency.


Frequency of radar transmitter is 3-9GHz
Frequency of spark gap is say 20 khz
So transmitter  of radar must send burst of the signal of 3 to 9 GHz that  has a length of burst matching spark gap frequency of switching
In between of intervals when transmitter is OFF the receiver input is not shorted by spark and using the same antenna  of radar
That signal goes from antenna to receiver of radar till the next spark jumps shorting receiver again. 
Receiver is receiving signal reflected from objects.


We have noticed that based on geometry of spark gap, with the same power supply- generator  we have soft spark or violent spark


Wesley


PS: pictures attached show geometry of spark gap tube only for one particular group of spark gaps
This one gives  nice soft spark .
The tubes pictured have addition of vacuum that in my opinion  makes it less vulnerable to atmospheric impurities

[wattsup]

Sorry for long post but.........

@wattsup,
I already tried to increase the cap on AV plug and have seen that spike repetition rate decreases and of course the available HV increases.
Roberto

@ronotte and others

Your confirmation of adding an extra cap will change the trumpet waveform therefore indicates that the origin of the waveform is indeed a relation between flyback HV energy output gradually increasing in the capacitance values relative to the type of diodes used. But the output is not sufficient and this leads me to the following where eventually I know we will all have to take a few steps back again and go over one major part of the system because there is something else that is still not asked about in specific points regarding the WNYg devices. @stefan just re-posted the already very well known @stivep-WNY circuit and you can see there the negative from the flyback is going to the Center Tap of the CC (CTCC).

Added: Also @FreeEnergyInfo just posted a drawing (WESLEY scheme 2.JPG) and again at the lower part of the circuit you can see the negative of the HV is again going through a secondary coil in the flyback and notice all their drawings always refer to the TBC110 flyback. In that circuit they are pulsing the primary with two mosfets one on each end very similar to what I am doing with only one mosfet so they are most likely a producing a sequenced pulsing, one side, then other side, etc. But that is not important for now.

But again the original circuit was based on what the WNY group did when @stivep was visiting with them.

In that particular case were all this OU observation started, their flyback was rather special. Again I repeat, notice in the diagram as I had tried to point out so many times in the past and even tried to find some more common analogs, the HV negative is going back into the flyback through a second coil before it leaves the flyback and heads out to the CTCC. That HV negative is going through that second flyback coil. Now that second flyback coil is then doing two things. It is producing energy on its own from the primary impress but it is also being driven by the HV negative to act as a second primary on top of acting like a second secondary. There is a damn lot of action happening in that flyback coil that we have no clue of and it is that negative that is leaving the flyback that is going to the CTCC. The action is so great that when I tried many times to replicate it with regular flybacks, they did not last long. I went through four of them just to make sure.

This is not the same as for us, to just put our HV negative directly to the CTCC. The negative of the WNY group leaving their flyback has a different conditioning as if the HV coil and the negative coil all make one coil and this also changes how the HV coil will react both with its internal flyback and to produce output. That internal flyback energy blew my power supply. So how much energy does it take. It fried my PS fat output diodes. This is one big leaf that has been left unturned or non-experimented due to our lack of finding the right flyback types. What I think is that since the HV negative was going through that second flyback coil, the HV negative leaving the flyback was much more to the zero state then anything we will be able to reproduce with out present flybacks or HV sources. Yes we can see the quasi effects of what we are doing but what would happen if the lack of a flyback second negative coil is a major deal breaker. We are just assuming that this second coil is pointless and that the HV negative in both cases, one going directly to the CTCC or through the second coil are producing identical HV negative potential. This is the biggest inconsistency with our replications and hence since the beginning of these trails I had tried to reconcile the lack of that second flyback coil.

I wonder what @stivep was using as a HV source as in his last video it is rather confusing where he used Glens' square transformer but then the video reverts back to sections of his previous video. So it is hard to understand. Also, when @stivep was playing with the controls on that instrument to his left and the bulbs started to light up, what were those adjustments. That also was not to clear.  I understand @stivep lit up two 100 watt bulbs with his system but what was the input to need two sets of three huge diodes in parallel and 5 caps in parallel. I think we may all be having the same lack of that secondary coil in the flyback (SCF).

I am also thinking that the SCF may also be acting like a break. I have seen that before when pulsing the yoke. I had two frequencies on two coils 15T and 50T and the output at 150T was only 60 volts. When I turned off one of the coils the voltage went up to 600 volts. When I put the offed coil on again, the voltage went back to 60 volts. The offed coil was breaking the output of the other coil.

So what could the SFC be doing in the WNYg TBC110 flyback? Why is no one ever looking at that? Can the WNYg do the same thing without that TBC110 flyback by using any other non-dioded flyback without an SFC? These questions I had asked months ago and in the scientific rule of progressive gain in understanding they should have been answered months ago, but instead we are still at the scratching heads stage. At least answer a very simple question. Will the WNYg device work without the SFC connection? That is an easy one to answer since all you have to do is remove that connection and do the test again. VERY EASY TO DO AND VERY REVEALING.

Anyways sorry if I am jumping all over the place. Now that I know for myself how to control the environment to produce the trumpet wave, with thanks to you, I will do some testing on that but I know for sure that the above flyback concerns are real. We have to understand that in the WNYg videos, those guys were running their flyback with like 5 watts, if I remember correctly and that is a damn good place to be when you are looking for OU. Compare that to my set-up that is consuming a minimum of 20 watts to 35 watts of input energy just to get the stage 1 spark going.

Maybe if the Katcher coil had three coils, first the HV coil, then a second wind over that maybe half way that will take the HV negative, then the primary, this could replicate in a way the original WNYg flyback method.

Again sorry for my rambling on. The problem is we keep seeing new circuits. New build methods. New this and that, but from the WNYg what we have always seen but neglected is the SFC. WHAT is it really doing in the whole process, no one knows and we can spend years on all these simple peripherals and always just get to point 1 again. Some will say the SFC is not important. THEN WHY IS IT ALWAYS IN THE WNYg DIAGRAMS?

wattsup

[Kator01]

@wesley,


the russian flyback is a problem as there is less possibility to replicate without having the exact specification for an alternative HV-transformer. We don´t have these here in the west. We need some standard-transformer available en masse, like a MOT for example although some might object that the core-material is of poor quality and not applicable. I amjust throwing my thoughts in here.

I am thinking about an altered MOT-transformer. In the past I prepared some MOT-transformers ( rescued from the dump nearby) by first spinning of the magnetic shunts with an hydraulic press and then cutting the bottom-core off with the cutting-wheel of a angle-grinder. Following this I placed a 0.1 mm foil on the botton-core and remounted it with external bolts. In this  way I achieved a well defined airgap and can drive the MOT now even up to a few Kiloherz. I do not know how far I can go with the frequnency but will test it as soon as I will have time. This is just a suggestion- other ideas welcome.

Regards

Kator01