STEORN DEMO LIVE & STREAM in Dublin, December 15th, 10 AM

[PaulLowrance]

With respect to using two trigger coils, one to turn on, one to turn off, all we need is a T flip flop. Of you'll need a schmitt trigger for the coil inputs. Simple! 

[Bruce_TPU]

Hello ALL,

Below is the first idea I have been stewing on all day, as I wind toroids.  I am now working on my fourth and last one.  Tomorrow the electronics.  I will use Ossies circuit, seeing it uses the least power thus far.

I have one more CRAZY idea that I am drawing up and will post in a few minutes... It incorporates some of ya'lls ideas in a unique way.

Cheers,

Bruce

[plengo]

Forgive me for posting this here. It comes from MileHigh logical dispute of how orbo could work if it is OU or not. He thinks that it is impossible to be OU based on this very thought logical dissertation.

This comes from another forum that I have no rights to post. I do bring it here not for more flaming but to raise my "solution" to his argument. My solution will be posted right after this post.

From MileHigh:

<<< Copied over from "The Buzz" a.k.a. Everybody must get Steorned >>>

Hi Eatenbyagrue and all interested in the recent Steorn demo,

Thanks for your comments and I will be an OU Exile on Main Street and I can live with that. Thanks for the info about Omnibus and this posting will be my simplified analysis of the actual power-in/power-out of the Lucite pulse motors that Steorn demonstrated.

Anyone can feel free to copy and paste the following into the OU thread at your own risk. Perhaps posting a link would be less riskier. Anybody can copy this to the Steorn forum if they want also.

For starters, I noticed that K4zep/Ben on the OU forum has basically already given the correct description of the energy dynamics of the motor when running at a steady-state speed and I heartily congratulate him for that. I will be stating essentially the same thing but perhaps with a bit more detail.

So we know that the Steorn pulse motors are attraction motors, and when they are running at a steady-state speed the power in must be equal to the power out. If you look at a finite time interval, then the energy in must equal the energy out. This is a simple fact that is applicable to any type of motor. When you first plug in a motor, the rotor speeds up and levels off at a speed where the power in equals the power out, it is as simple as that.

The power in consists of the electrical power in, and there are no other sources.

The power out consists of the friction in the bearings (heat), the air friction (also heat) and the energy that the generator coils send back to the battery (which becomes stored electrical energy and heat).

To keep things simple, we will lump the friction in the bearings and the air friction together, and call that "friction."

Therefore, (electrical power in) = (the mechanical friction power out) + (the mechanical generator coil power out).

Stating it like this may be a little clearer for some: (electrical power in) - (the mechanical friction power out) - (the mechanical generator coil power out) = 0.

This is what is going on when the Steorn pulse motor is running at a steady state speed. Everything is in balance.

Steorn is claiming that the generator coils are returning three times the electrical power in and sending that back to the battery. We are going to see if this claim is likely true or not true.

I am going to talk about the motor energy dynamics at an abstract level. This means for this discussion I don't care about the specific measurements or the RPM or whatever, I just want to get a handle on what is going on first. If I want to later I can make some measurements and punch in the numbers.

I am going to talk about "units of energy," when I analyze what the motor is doing. It is more convenient to use "units of energy" instead of "units of power" but the analysis either way will be the same. To repeat, these "units of energy" are an abstraction, and they can be considered a "currency" for purposes of the analysis because we know that energy goes from one place to another and changes form. Even though the energy changes form, for the purposes of this discussion everything is expressed in terms of units of energy.

For starters, let's assume that when the rotor is spinning at its steady-state speed, that it stores a minimum of 100 units of energy.

Ben made a very astute observation when he stated that the rotor is always accelerating and decelerating when it turns. The rotor accelerates when it gains energy from the magnetic attraction and decelerates when it looses energy due to friction and when it transfers energy into the pickup coils. This important fact will be critical to the energy analysis.

The issue of how the Steorn motor is driven can be simplified also. Simply forget for a while that it is a system where a magnet is attracted to a ferrite core and then the ferrite core is made to "disappear" when the toroidal coil is energized. The only thing that you need to know is that you put a pulse of electrical energy into a coil, and the rotor speeds up, it is as simple as that. It is no different than having a conventional pulse motor and either generating an attraction pulse before the rotor magnet reaches top-dead-center, or generating a repulsion pulse after the rotor magnet has passed top-dead-center. My gut feeling is that the conventional attraction and repulsion pulses are more efficient than the Steorn "core disappearing" pulse but the true answer to that would require testing or simulation.

I am going to repeat this again because I know this simple fact will "upset" some of the readers here: It DOES NOT MATTER if it is an attraction pulse, a repulsion pulse, or a "core disappearing" pulse, they all do fundamentally the same thing: You expend electrical energy by pulsing a coil and the net result is that the rotor speeds up. Let that sink into your brains because the statement is absolutely true. You pulse electricity in and you end up with the rotor spinning a bit faster for ALL THREE FLAVOURS OF PULSE. Some of the electrical pulse energy gets stored as rotational energy in the rotor, some of it is lost as heat. Let this fact sink in.

So, let's look at what is happening in the motor using the abstract "energy units." I can imagine some people out there objecting to this concept. Just go with the flow and perhaps learn something new.

Here is a chronological breakdown of the events relative to the Steorn motor with respect to a single pulse. This can then be applied to all of the pulses. It is all about using your mind to visualize what is really going on, where we will "slow down time" and look at the sequence of events step by step.

1. <before the pulse>..................................... rotor spinning with 100 units of energy
2. <pulse event>........................................... 10 units of electrical energy pulsed into the toroidal coil
2.1 <heat slice of pulse> ................................ 5 units of electrical energy pulse lost as heat
2.2 <useful energy slice of pulse>..................... 5 units of electrical energy transferred into the rotor
3. <rotor energy after pulse>.......................... rotor now spinning with 105 units of energy
4. <friction losses>....................................... 1 unit of rotor energy lost due to friction
5. <rotor energy after friction losses>.............. rotor now spinning with 104 units of energy
6. <rotor energy transferred into pick-up coils>.. 4 units of rotor energy transferred into pick-up coils
7. <rotor energy after pick-up coils>................. rotor now spinning with 100 units of energy
8. <GO BACK TO STEP 1>


The above gives you an absolutely accurate energy breakdown of what is happening when the rotor is spinning at at steady state speed. Even if your tachometer says 2000 RPM, if you have four magnets on your rotor then the above sequence of events happens four times per revolution, every 90 degrees. The rotor is constantly accelerating and decelerating.

So where does that leave us with respect to energy (or power) in vs. energy (or power) out?

You can see that you pump 10 units of energy into the motor and you get only 4 units of energy back from the pick-up coils. We will further divide the energy coming back from the pick-up coils into 1 unit lost as heat due to the diodes in the full-wave bridge rectifier and the charging efficiency of the battery. That leaves us with 3 units of recharging energy going into the battery from the 10 units of electrical energy that we first put into the system, 30% efficiency.

I am giving you an estimate of 10 units in, and 3 units back for 30% efficiency.
Steorn is stating 10 units in and 30 units back for 300% efficiency, an over unity device.

Notice that this analysis has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the energy in the spinning rotor like Omnibus on OU believes. He is absolutely wrong and should take a physics course.

Some of you may want to challenge the 5 units lost as heat when the electrical pulse of 10 units is delivered to the motor. I don't know what the precise split is but with 100% certainty I can tell you that there IS a split. The Steorn attraction motor method looks very inefficient to me. When the magnet is 2/3 away from the saturated toroidal core the attraction forces that you are eliminating are very low, yet you are still energizing the toroid with the full pulse power. Don't forget the toroid gets hot in Ben's clips, and heat is lost energy.

By the same token, where does Steorn get the 30 units of energy back like they claim? WHERE? Look at the sequence of events above again and tell me where the extra energy comes from.

If some of you think that the magic extra energy comes from the "core disappearing" pulse then I have got some news for you. If this was true then it would have been discovered in the 19th century and we would all be living in a free energy Jetson's Age right now as we speak. There is not a chance in hell that the "core disappearing" pulse is a source of over unity and miraculously speeds up the rotor to produce over unity. Anybody that thinks this is true is going to have to prove this with experimentation and theory. Good luck.

So, now that we have an understanding of the energy dynamics of the Steorn motor, all that you have to do is make the measurements and punch in the numbers so that the abstract energy description above becomes real-world measured values.

If you are following what I am saying and you agree with me, then here is the crux of the matter with respect to the Steron demo in Dublin for their Lucite motor setups:

1. Connect the differential voltage probe across the 1.5 volt source battery.
2. Connect the current probe to the output wire from the battery powering the motor.
3. Push a button on the high-end DSO and get an output power reading.
4. Connect the current probe to the power return wire coming from the generator coils section.
5. Push a button on the high-end DSO and get an input power reading.
6. Compare the power reading in step #5 with the power reading in step #3 to confirm or deny their claim of three times the power being returned to the battery as compared to what was being consumed by the pulse motor.

Stop and think for a second. They had all of the measurement equipment in place and it would have taken a maximum of 10 minutes to make the measurements above but they did not do it. Look into your hearts and souls and try to find the answer to that question.

Why didn't Steorn make the above measurements to prove their claim of over unity when the Lucite pulse motors were all there and running off the batteries, and the high-end Tektronix DSO with the differential voltage probe and the fancy current probe were all there and available on site? Why didn't they do it?

The answer is because their Lucite pulse motors were conventional under unity devices and they dared not do it.

MileHigh









Well, a good idea just occurred to me for how experimenters can get to the bottom of the whole Steorn December 2009 pulse motor issue - is it or is it not an over unity device?

Let's start with a bit of speculation about how this is going to play out in 2010 with respect to the replicators. The "replicator buzz" has already started. People are trying different magnet and toroid configurations, different numbers of turns, positions, etc, etc, etc, and they are marveling at this new Steorn pulse motor. Already people are playing with the motor configuration in search of higher RPMs, faster accelaration and so on and so on. This is going to go on for nine months to a year, we have all seen this scenario play out before.

There is a huge down side to this scenario. People, the replicators, forget all about the over unity claim and just focus on the building. They stop even trying to make any serious measurements or they make "fake" measurements. They measure the RPMs and current consumptions for different configurations and get all excited about how "efficient" their pulse motors are. Big deal. The quest for over unity gets lost in the shuffle. It's not easy to make measurements to prove or disprove over unity but on the other hand it is fun to build motors and measure RPMs. Before you know it, making a serious attempt to prove or disprove Steorn's claim is lost in the shuffle. This is a huge problem.

On top of all of this, you get people going down other alleys, most likely blind alleys. Notice that Paul Lawrence is off on a "temperature of the magnets" kick. Seriously, what does this have to do with Steorn's claim?

Step #1 is to read my energy analysis of the pulse motor in my posting #11 above. Read it over and over until you understand it.

To confirm or deny Steorn's claim about their pulse motor it is time to think outside of the box.

Going back to my energy analysis, the real issue is this: The amount of rotational kinetic energy that the rotor picks up from the pulse has to be greater than the amount of electrical energy expended to do the pulse.

The generator pick up coils are only there to tap into the "extra energy" imparted into the rotor by the electrical pulse. The generator coils can be completely ignored in your test procedure if you want to, they are nothing but window dressing.

I will repeat: Read my energy analysis in posting #11 and you have to conclude that the amount of rotational kinetic energy that the rotor picks up from the pulse has to be greater than the amount of electrical energy expended to do the pulse if you are going to make a claim of over unity.

So what you can do is strip the problem/replication down to the bone and make the proper measurements.

When you strip the problem down to the bone and you work with the motor, the only thing that counts is to see if when you pulse energy into the toroidal coils, is to check if the rotor ends up with more rotational kinetic energy in it as compared to how much electrical energy you expended to pulse the coils in the first place. That is not so easy to measure but that is what the whole deal is about.

You can play with different toroid and magnet configurations with your Steorn pulse motor replication and have some fun, but what really counts is what I just said above, everything else is unimportant and can be ignored.

Here is how we can strip the problem down to the bone and make some REAL measurements:

Forget about the motor entirely and work with a linear track. Place the magnet on a buggy and place the buggy on a near-frictionless linear track (for example: use a child's train set) and pulse the toroidal coil and measure the increase in speed of the buggy. Use a video camera to do this and look at the video frame by frame and measure the velocity before and after the toroid is pulsed.

If you weigh the magnet-buggy combination, then you can calculate the increase in kinetic energy based on 1/2*m*v-squared. Use your scope to measure the energy in the pulse. You can try different combinations of magnets and toroids on the linear track.

You are going to find that you always have to put in more electrical energy to pulse the toroid than you can get in increased kinetic energy from the magnet-buggy speeding up. However, I know many won't believe me. Fine, don't take my word for it, do the tests yourself.

Does everyone see what I have just proposed? I have just given the replicators a way to bypass all of the bullshit and craziness where for the next nine months people are going to be playing with motor combinations and nobody is actually going to make any real measurements because it is too hard to do it. All that they end up doing is playing with a new type of pulse motor.

Strip the motor away and get it down to its bare essentials - a linear track setup where you actually can make some real-world measurements and see if pulsing the toroidal coil will give you an energy gain or not.

You have to think outside of the box and I just came up with a damn good idea for the replicators and I will cross my fingers that somebody actually does it.

This Steorn stuff is going to result in dozens of replicators playing with magnets, toroids, and motors, and nobody is going to even get remotely close to confirming or denying if the Steorn claim of free energy is true or not. Switching to a linear track, a scope, and a video camera, something that anyone can do, will actually give the experimenters the power to confirm or deny Steorn's claims.

The energy analysis in my posting #11 is the key, and the energy analysis says that the mechanical kinetic energy gained per pulse has to be greater than the electrical energy expended per pulse. Everything else is bullshit and can be ignored. I am also telling you that this will never happen, but don't believe me if you don't want to - just do something that is REAL, the linear track measurement system is REAL, the motor is just a toy that is too hard to make measurements on.

MileHigh

[Cloxxki]

What about 7 rotors, 13 toroids, all of which used dual. Imagine these bunched up almost like oranges in a crate.
   O
O    O
   O
O    O
   O

5 for 8 is a bit tighter, but all 8 would be dual as well. Middle rotor is smaller.

O    O
   O
O    O

What about 3 for 3? If that could be made to fit.
    O
  \    /
O  |   O

I like 5 toroid for 4 rotors, all dual. I can see a 6th if you go 3D, but that is surely pushing it for toroid space.

O -  O
-  x  -
O -  O

No idea if this makes any sense at all, other wise sorry for the bandwidth.

[plengo]

(continuation of MileHigh argument I posted before)

I think if this orbo really is OU it must be one of two options:

1) when the pulsating the toroid the kinetic energy created on the rotor is greater than the energy used to pulsate the toroid. That's is also a possibility MileHigh accepts.

2) no extra kinetic energy is created on the rotor BUT somehow pickup generating coils, using something similiar to what we have on the toroid pulsating / magnet no EMF interaction, is creating extra energy from the kinetic rotor energy WITHOUT EMF again and therefore (Lens laws) generating energy WITHOUT using kinetic energy as the source. So basicaly one would have free rotating energy being used to generate as much energy one wants by simply increasing the number of pickup/generating coils.

3) a combination of 1 and 2.

Fausto.