German Scientist Posts Complete Free Energy Documentation Online

[Xaero_Vincent]

Hi Jimi,

I just saw the video right before I read your post heh. Dr. Turtur has a new web page with the link to the video.

I've been in contact with Dr. Turtur the last couple months.We've discussed ways to improve the design of the rotor and possibly use a magnet rotor as well. I have designed an oil-less self-adjusting mechanism and a keyed shaft design to reduce friction of the bearings. I think my design ideas will solve the mechanical issues of the rotors and make power generation possible.

The video you see is a rotor tested in air. Ionization occurs in air so the power loss will always be greater than the driving force caused by vacuum energy. This problem can only be avoided in a high vacuum environment. Dr. Turtur has expressed his willingness to help me design a build a vacuum chamber to build a power producing machine.

The problem is the cost of building a vacuum chamber, buying the vacuum pumps and necessary monitoring equipment.

The chamber shell will need steel (preferably stainless) at around 1" thickness to withstand the pressure of the outside air. Steel sheets at this thickness are very expensive, heavy and must be rust-free and welded by a professional. Turbo molecular vacuum pumps with backing pumps are also necessary and these can cost several thousand dollars. The monitoring equipment and ionization gauge aren't cheap either.

I imagine we can expect to spend $10-20K to build a machine capable of only producing 1 kW of power. If it weren't for the need of a vacuum chamber, a machine capable of producing 1kW could probably be built for under $200.

We need to think of effective ways to significantly reduce the costs if this technology is to ever take off.

[spoondini]

Couple of thoughts:
- considering the cop of 50 experienced in the vacuum chamber, will a partial vacuum chamber get us practical results?  A cop of 1.01 and the world changes.
- along the same line of thought, can we achieve practical results with better insulation to reduce ionization of the environment.
- should we set our target output lower to reduce development costs for proof of concept.  I wouldn't want to sink 20k into something still unverified. We've still not seen this device looped and self running.

[flathunter]

Great to see the continued interest, and I think spoondini has a good point.

Can we not try for COP greater than 1 with a vaccum desicator?  I dont have one, but i'm very tempted to buy one, as I love the simplicity of Turturs rotor - and I'm a simple kind of guy 

Nonetheless, I dont wont to dissuade you Vincent, if you've got the cash!!!  I say go for it! 

[spoondini]

Another thought, if we can loop and self run in a laboratory vacuum chamber (excluding power required for vacuum chamber), it should be no problem to secure funding for commercial prototype if the math indicates likely cop>1 after powering chamber of a scaled up version.  Folks, there's plenty of money on the sidelines without good ideas to fund.

[Xaero_Vincent]

Those are some good thoughts. The greater the vacuum the lower the leakage loss, however if Dr. Turtur's theory is correct, a moderately high vacuum should be enough to obtain a COP slightly above one.

I'm pondering if the vacuum can be replaced by gases or oils with high dielectric properties. Compressed sulfur hexafluoride is a gas used in high voltage application for its high dielectric strength. Certain types of oils are also known for their dielectric properties. Perhaps the electrostatic rotor can be submerged into mineral or organic oils. I'll mention these thoughts to Claus and get his opinion.