PopularFX
Home Help Search Login Register
Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.
2024-05-17, 20:58:37
News: A feature is available which provides a place all members can chat, either publicly or privately.
There is also a "Shout" feature on each page. Only available to members.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4
Author Topic: SEMP AI Smart Electromagnetic Generator (AISEG)  (Read 11261 times)
Newbie
*

Posts: 22
Hope all your New Year dreams come true!  :D O0
   
Jr. Member
**

Posts: 85
Some photos
   

Newbie
*

Posts: 44
Thanks @maxmalone - where were these photos from?

A reverse image search of the top one indicates that some were taken at this presentation in 2017:

http://www.womancs.co.kr/news/articleView.html?idxno=40675

Here is a google translation from the Korean:



---------------------------
“Never interrupt someone doing what you said couldn't be done.” -- Amelia Earhart
   
Jr. Member
**

Posts: 85
The photos are from Google using the keyword: aiseg
you have to look in old resources
   

Newbie
*

Posts: 44
Thanks. It seems that a year later (Nov 2018) they were trying to sell systems to Vietnam.

https://www.newsprime.co.kr/news/article/?no=437283

Google translation below:


---------------------------
“Never interrupt someone doing what you said couldn't be done.” -- Amelia Earhart
   
Jr. Member
**

Posts: 85
Thanks. It seems that a year later (Nov 2018) they were trying to sell systems to Vietnam.

https://www.newsprime.co.kr/news/article/?no=437283

Google translation below:

I wonder why there isn't any more information.
They have reportedly signed a dozen or so contracts to deliver many units. There is no information whether it was a fraud or the orders were completed.
It's 2024. They explained this by the lack of valid patents. Only in 2022 did they receive several patents. What's next ?
   

Newbie
*

Posts: 44
Quote
I wonder why there isn't any more information

Yes - it is all rather mysterious.


---------------------------
“Never interrupt someone doing what you said couldn't be done.” -- Amelia Earhart
   
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 462
I wonder why there isn't any more information.
They have reportedly signed a dozen or so contracts to deliver many units. There is no information whether it was a fraud or the orders were completed.
It's 2024. They explained this by the lack of valid patents. Only in 2022 did they receive several patents. What's next ?


It was patented by Buforn in 1914
   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1987
I wonder why there isn't any more information.
...

The likely reason is that the first scam failed, so they're trying to relaunch it to get new investors.
Who can believe that in 5 years we'll have more than today, when 5 years after their 2017 announcement, nothing has come out, contrary to their forecasts?
I don't see anything convincing in their announcements, they can't even provide the 70 patents they're talking about, nor the reports of the expert appraisals allegedly carried out by independent companies, some of which are claimed to be American, but I didn't hear any names given in response to the person who asked for them in one of the COP28 videos.
I saw no development on the theoretical aspect, nor on the origin of the additional energy.
Finally, their site is full of references to a clean, green world, which is typical of the environmentalist conditioning we've seen around past scams, the latest with Hxxxx. Last but not least, references to an AI for surfing on trendy topics don't bode well.

Edit : name covered) pm sent)
« Last Edit: 2024-01-05, 23:01:53 by Chet K »


---------------------------
"Open your mind, but not like a trash bin"
   
Group: Restricted
Full Member
*

Posts: 102
...
« Last Edit: 2024-02-27, 16:13:27 by stivep »
   
Jr. Member
**

Posts: 85
F6FLT - 70 patents? I think it's about all the patents of their activities.


This is a research institute of Korea. This is how they introduce themselves. Is this a planned fraud? Who is behind this? Korean government?
This is some nonses. On the other hand, they sign contracts. How is it possible that Arabs buy blindly?

Their website looks like a typical green energy scam website, I agree with that.
« Last Edit: 2024-01-05, 16:34:20 by maxmalone »
   
Full Member
***

Posts: 114
"This is some sonses."

What is 'sonses'?

Thanks in advance.
bi
   
Jr. Member
**

Posts: 85
"This is some sonses."

What is 'sonses'?

Thanks in advance.
bi

oh... This is some nonses.
   
Full Member
***

Posts: 114
oh... This is some nonses.

Thanks. That is nonsense. Makes sense now.
bi
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1870
I am writing a paper with the title Remanent Magnetism as an Energy Source.  Below is the introduction chapter.  When you have read this are you still convinced the SEMP system is a scam?

Smudge 

Everyone skilled in the science of magnetism or electromagnetism knows about remanent magnetism, the magnetic field BR that exists within ferromagnetic material after the current that creates the field is turned off.  There are two features of ferromagnetic materials that are important: -
•   For permanent magnets it is desirable that the remanent field remains permanent throughout its operating environment.  Temperature affects this, at temperatures above the Curie point the field disappears completely and near the Curie point the field degrades.  “Hard” materials for permanent magnets have been developed to maximise their BR values and to have high Curie temperatures well above their operating environment, leading to magnets that hold their magnetization for tens of years or more. 
•   For transformer cores it is desirable to have zero remanent field.  This is not achievable, but “soft” materials have been developed to have sufficiently small BR that the resultant area of their BH loop is small, thus minimising core losses.  As these use alternating polarity fields the remanence alternates hence the any permanent nature of the field is of little consequence.

Throughout the years of power transformer development, it appears that no attention has been paid to materials that might exhibit semi-permanent magnetism, where the magnetism is ephemeral, presumably no one could see any practical use.  Here the material is magnetized to a field BR with a current pulse, then with no further current input the field decays to zero.  It is expected that this might happen at temperatures near the Curie point, so this feature would be a thermal effect.  That this might happen at ambient temperature has not been a consideration, hence it appears no work has been carried out to achieve this.  Until now!

The SEMP Research Institute is a South Korean Group that has a partnership with Global Solutions for Project Management in Abu Dhabi.  Their AI Smart Electromagnetic Generator (AISEG) recently demonstrated at the COP28 Summit held in Dubai is claimed to have efficiency significantly greater than 100%, and a study of their patent applications reveal they use within their transformers a unique core material, pure iron that has undergone a special form of treatment.  They claim that this treatment yields a demagnetization time can be as little as 1/450 seconds (2.22mS).  They do not state how their system uses this feature, but further study of their patent applications shows that it relies on ephemeral remanence BR where the magnetic field decays naturally with that order of demagnetization time.  A study of their waveforms reveal that the magnetizing is performed by narrow pulses of current at a pulse rate of 120 per second.  Their over-unity efficiencies reach highest values at the narrowest pulse widths where they quote a 0.5% duty cycle.  That is 41.7μS pulses repeated every 8.33mS.  During the 8.29mS off-time a separate series of coils obtain induced voltage from the decaying magnetism that then feed current to the load.  With their heat treatment process creating such short demagnetization times the field decay can be completed within the 8.29mS off-time ready for the next magnetizing pulse.  During this time energy is being delivered to the load but no electrical energy is input.  They alternate the magnetizing direction each 8.33mS so the output voltage waveforms appear as pseudo 60Hz AC.  The question then remains, can energy in each output pulse exceed the initial input energy needed to magnetize the iron?  The standard answer to this question given by most scientists is NO, Conservation of Energy (CoE) demands this.  But during the output pulse Lenz’s Law tells you that the induced current is trying to stop the remanent BR decay, something at present unknown is causing that decay and that is the driving force for the output energy.  Thus, that unknown driving force could be the source of excess energy, and when that source is considered CoE is satisfied.  If the SEMP claims of efficiencies far exceeding 100% are true, then perhaps the answer to the above question is YES.  This paper investigates this possibility.

It should be noted that ephemeral remanence (BR fields that decay naturally without any electrical stimulation) is an unknown feature of magnetism that is currently not taught or studied.  One possibility is that this is a thermal phenomenon, thermal agitation of the atomic dipoles responsible for the magnetism causes them to lose their spatial alignment.  If so, then excess energy could be received thermally, the system could extract heat energy from the environment, in effect acting as a heat pump.  A magnetic refrigeration heat pump is a known process that currently uses exotic materials like gadolinium and praseodymium.  Clearly iron is a much cheaper material for that use.  The iron cores used in the SEMP system are not solid but are thin-walled tubes through which air is passed.  Although they claim this is for cooling purposes it could equally be the opposite.
A second possibility is that the BR decay comes from quantum uncertainty disturbing the dipole alignments in which case energy is extracted from the aether in which everything lies.  Until this ephemeral BR is investigated we will not know, but in view of the SEMP claims such investigations should take place.
   
Jr. Member
**

Posts: 85
This device can be easily compared to other similar devices, e.g. Meyer. They also have similar coil settings and a pure iron core. Mayer writes that it is a transmutation of iron. It's possible that we don't fully understand what's going on. Whether the magnetic domains are rotated or aligned. What causes this rapid process where not much energy is needed. This is what SR193 wrote about. "We have mages managed." The pulse reverses the magnetic field in the ferrite for a short pulse.
Maybe it's just something similar, but very similar.

The color of the SMEP core does not resemble the appearance of iron and is probably painted with paint. This is even described in the patent. After the technological process, it is protected with e.g. oil. or in this case, maybe paint.

Residual magnetization is always a problem in a regular transformer, that's true, but how can it work for us?
example: we have a glass with water. We pour out 90% and something remains at the bottom. 10% water. How can we pour out 100% of the water and have 10% at the bottom?
I know this isn't a perfect example, but maybe it's enough to understand that it doesn't work like that.

Rather closer to what Mayer writes.
   
Newbie
*

Posts: 2
Hello Smudge, will you post the article here when it is finished/published, or will it be available to read? I am very interested in reading the rest.
   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1987
@Smudge

Your idea that heat would be the cause of demagnetization after the pulse and therefore the source of the energy, is within the realm of theoretical possibility.
However, the magnetization energy also depends on the heat; it must be greater when the magnetic dipoles are thermally agitated, since more effort is required to align them. Otherwise, it would be a Maxwell demon. If nothing demonstrates in the general case the theoretical impossibility of a Maxwell demon, on the other hand it remains very uncertain and requires an unmistakable experimental demonstration. If the OU is as significant as they say, the cooling would surely not have gone unnoticed, but they don't talk about it. They only speak of an asymmetry of physical phenomena, of CP violation, and of the coupling of magnetic moments in resonance, all things where, moreover, the conservation of energy applies as everywhere. So I don't see the point in imagining what they themselves don't propose.


---------------------------
"Open your mind, but not like a trash bin"
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1870
@Smudge

Your idea that heat would be the cause of demagnetization after the pulse and therefore the source of the energy, is within the realm of theoretical possibility.
However, the magnetization energy also depends on the heat; it must be greater when the magnetic dipoles are thermally agitated, since more effort is required to align them. Otherwise, it would be a Maxwell demon. If nothing demonstrates in the general case the theoretical impossibility of a Maxwell demon, on the other hand it remains very uncertain and requires an unmistakable experimental demonstration. If the OU is as significant as they say, the cooling would surely not have gone unnoticed, but they don't talk about it. They only speak of an asymmetry of physical phenomena, of CP violation, and of the coupling of magnetic moments in resonance, all things where, moreover, the conservation of energy applies as everywhere. So I don't see the point in imagining what they themselves don't propose.
The magnetization energy is easily derived from the BH characteristic and does not depend significantly on heat.  I do not see this as a Maxwell demon.  Here is my latest paper on the subject.

Smudge
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2660
Smudge
Quote
They claim this treatment yields a demagnetization time that can be
as little as 1/450 seconds (2.22mS), but they do not define what they mean by
“demagnetization time”. Also they do not state how their system uses this
feature, but further study of their patent applications shows that it relies on
ephemeral remanence BR where the magnetic field decays naturally with that
order of demagnetization time.

I can add to this point from my work with induction and switched reluctance generators. SRG's magnetize a moving iron rotor core as it aligns with a stator coil. We magnetize the rotor core with an impulse on alignment and as the rotor core moves away from the stator coil the "changing magnetic field" induces an electric current in the coil. The generator function relies on the fact that the moving iron core changes the stator magnetic field faster than a stationary iron core.

Stationary iron rotor core and stator coil = inductor
Moving iron core and stationary stator coil = generator.

As we can see the only requirement to produce an "induction generator" is that the magnetic field change more than expected. Simply put, induction and power generation only occur when a magnetic field changes and the amount of change determines the power generated. In other words, the stator coil does not care whether the magnetic field is moving away or collapses faster than expected (demagnetization) because the field change the coil experiences is the same.

As Faraday eluded concerning induction, it does not matter how the field change occurs only that it does.

AC


---------------------------
Comprehend and Copy Nature... Viktor Schauberger

“The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool.”― Richard P. Feynman
   
Full Member
***

Posts: 114
The magnetization energy is easily derived from the BH characteristic and does not depend significantly on heat.  I do not see this as a Maxwell demon.  Here is my latest paper on the subject.

Smudge

Hi Smudge,
Nice job on the white paper. I think I am able to understand. I do wonder, when looking at the demagnetization, why you're not in quadrant 2. And then using a permeance coefficient and recoil permeability yielding a B value much lower than Br.

Beyond that, using the energy represented by the areas in the shown B H curves, the volume of iron, assumed current and frequency, can the approximate energy be calculated and compared to the input?

Personally I don't believe this "hysteresis energy" can come anywhere close to the magnitude they claim. My experience with wound field motors and generators is that iron (steel) hysteresis loss (energy) amounts to only a few percent of rated power output. I don't see why this ephemeral retentivity would not be on the same order of magnitude.

As with many of these FE or OU schemes of which I am skeptical, I hope I'm wrong.
bi
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1870
Hi Smudge,
Nice job on the white paper. I think I am able to understand. I do wonder, when looking at the demagnetization, why you're not in quadrant 2. And then using a permeance coefficient and recoil permeability yielding a B value much lower than Br.
In normal transformer operation magnetization and demagnetization both occur in the first quadrant.  The demagnetization there is only partial (from Bmax down to Brem).  The remaining demagnetization (from Brem down to zero) takes place in the second quadrant. (The process then repeats itself on the second half cycle in quadrants 3 and 4)  SEMP ARE DOING SOMETHING THAT IS NOT RECOGNIZED IN TRANSFORMER THEORY, SOMETHING UNLNOWN TO ELECTRICAL ENGINEERS, TRANSFORMER ENGINEERS, MAGNETIC ENGINEERS, PHYSICISTS, PHYSICS PROFESSORS, SCIENTIFIC ADVISERS THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE WORLD.  They magnetize to Brem in the first quadrant with a current pulse that rises then falls back to zero.  THE FINAL DEMAGNETIZATION FROM Brem DOWN TO ZERO OCCURS DUE TO SOME UNKNOWN PHENOMENON THAT MAY OR MAY NOT BE THERMALLY DRIVEN.  So there is nothing to drive the system into the second quadrant.  The Lenz clamping load current in that part of the cycle keeps the driving H in the first quadrant. (Then there is a repeat at opposite polarity where you get quadrant 3 involved)

Smudge
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1870

Personally I don't believe this "hysteresis energy" can come anywhere close to the magnitude they claim. My experience with wound field motors and generators is that iron (steel) hysteresis loss (energy) amounts to only a few percent of rated power output. I don't see why this ephemeral retentivity would not be on the same order of magnitude.

As with many of these FE or OU schemes of which I am skeptical, I hope I'm wrong.
bi
Why do think that two different loops that have different driving forces will have the same area?

Smudge
   
Jr. Member
**

Posts: 85
I would love to believe that SEMP discovered something no one has seen before, but let's be realistic. The core would have to be prepared in a previously unknown way. However, adding carbon is not a miracle mechanism because this method has been used for a long time. It's called carbonizing, right.
You are talking about slowing down the demagnetization process and demagnetizing it spontaneously. Have you ever had a coil with a core and a load? What you call demagnetization is the BEMF force that acts every time for in and out. When the current from the coil is disconnected, the coil tends to get rid of the magnetic field, right. If the transformer core maintains magnetism then it stops demagnetization because it cannot do so. The core is, for example, a magnet. You won't make the magnet act as a transformer core. This is why there is a problem here.
The SEMP core would have to exhibit additional properties. E.g. magnetize with a small pulse up to 100% of its magnetic field. So, for example, a 1% pulse causes 100% core magnetization. Yes? what about demagnetization? here we now have another problem. A load that is constant.

Disturbing things should be noticed, such as the removal of information from websites that informed about SEMP. Why ?
   
Full Member
***

Posts: 114
Why do think that two different loops that have different driving forces will have the same area?

Smudge

Would not B H loops with the same area represent equal energies? Could their iron be that much different than motor lamination, like 10's of orders of magnitude?

You spent time showing B H area energy. I thought you were implying the excess energy was originating there. How does it relate?

My point is, even if all the energy (area encompassed B H) was converted to electrical output, it falls way short of what they claim. I was hoping that you may have some evidence of the magnitude of that B H energy from your analysis. I can just go on my gut here as I no longer have the analytical capability.
Thanks.
bi

   
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4
« previous next »


 

Home Help Search Login Register
Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u 2024-05-17, 20:58:37