PopularFX
Home Help Search Login Register
Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.
2024-05-17, 16:51:44
News: If you have a suggestion or need for a new board title, please PM the Admins.
Please remember to keep topics and posts of the FE or casual nature. :)

Pages: [1] 2 3 4
Author Topic: SEMP AI Smart Electromagnetic Generator (AISEG)  (Read 11249 times)
Full Member
***

Posts: 243
South Korea-based SEMP Group and Abu Dhabi-based Global Solutions for Project Management have launched a pathbreaking innovation that will shape the future of clean energy – the AI Smart Electromagnetic Generator (AISEG) at COP28 organized in Dubai, UAE.

AISEG is the world’s first successful system that generates higher efficiency output compared to input power. With over 70 patents in 60 countries, it does not have any rotating parts, does not produce carbon or heat emissions, is self-powered and delivers outstanding efficiency. It has a compact footprint and near-permanent lifespan - a one-stop solution for the world's energy needs.

SEMP Research Institute devised an AI Smart Electromagnetic Generator (AISEG) innovated based on the principles of Biot-Savart’s Law and Faraday’s Law.





Looks interesting. From what I can see in their launch photo, they're using 8x IGBT modules fixed to some pretty beefy heatsinks which suggest it's a high current device. There are 60x high wattage incandescent light bulbs hooked up. To be honest, their demo unit doesn't look too dissimilar to a few devices that I've seen on the various OU forums.

They have a YouTube channel here: https://www.youtube.com/@sempworld

This video explains the principle of operation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SLJH8Ad2b44

Here are some screenshots from the above video:











I'm not entirely sure what they mean by 'bandwagoning', but it seems like all they are doing is chopping up a DC input 120 times per second and exciting 30x coil packs with a time varying magnetic field.

I think they've just added AI to the name of the device because it's a hot topic at the moment.
   
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 338
Nice!   Hopefully this gets in production quickly.  I don't think the South Koreans are prone to scams as many countries are so I'll lean toward this being valid.  It does sound somewhat similar to Holcomb energy system in that it seems to be using moving magnetic fields without any physical moving devices.   Their website:
https://www.semp.or.kr/en/%EB%B0%9C%EC%A0%84%EA%B8%B0%EC%9D%98-%EC%97%AD%EC%82%AC

They have test results from nationally accredited testing institutes on the website.  From a PDF there it appears from a o-scope printout they have 0.799 kilowatt input and are getting 18.192 kilowatt output. 
   
Full Member
***

Posts: 243
Robert Murray-Smith has just posted a video on the AISEG.
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1870
Is there any chance someone here could find their patent applications.  They say there are PCT patent applications.

Smudge
   
Full Member
***

Posts: 243
I scoured the KIPO database and found the patent application. I've attached the original copy in Korean, along with a machine translated English verison.
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1870
I have a sneaking suspicion that the coil stacks have square loop ferrite material within them.  There is one secondary coil running the length of the long core and a plurality (good patent word that!) of primary coils.  The primry coils are given short duration current pulses in the sequences mentioned in the video.  These create semi-permanent areas of  magnetic polarization along the core that result in a cumulative effect as seen by the secondary.  The secondary sees a magnetic field that changes value in steps somehat like voltage multipliers get a stepped waveform.  Need more time to hone this into a workable scheme.

Edit, thanks for those patent details, your post came in while I was writing this one.

Smudge
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3377
Robert Murray-Smith has just posted a video on the AISEG.
That's a good overview of this device.
This Murray guy has a knack of stating the obvious which I would have never thought to explain to my audience, such as the difference between traffic laws and physical laws.

Anyway, he is correct about the ubiquitous fallacy of multiplying average voltage and current to yield average power (especially input power), however this objection does not apply to the calculation of output power when the load is purely resistive, because with such a load, there is no way for the current to be out of phase with the voltage.
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3377
Need more time to hone this into a workable scheme.
Do you see any orthogonal magnetic fluxes in this scheme ?
   
Full Member
***

Posts: 113
I scoured the KIPO database and found the patent application. I've attached the original copy in Korean, along with a machine translated English verison.

Thanks for the patent application links.

This thing is just a bad joke.
bi
   
Full Member
***

Posts: 243
I've attempted to bring out the details from the presentation slide shown in the video.

   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1870
Far better to show the exploded view in the patent.  Here the core 40 is pure iron in the form of a tube so that it can be kept cool by forcing air through it.  Temperature is important because the pure iron has to be heat treated in the presence of some carbon (white charcoal?) to alter is demagnetization time.  From the waveform images in the patent the iron has to hold its magnetization after the driving current is switched off, so I was nearly correct my assumption of square loop material.  In the exploded view there are two coils labelled 10 and three labelled 20.  The actual device has more than that.  The coils 20 are connected in series and are the output secondary.  The coils 10 are the input and are connected in parallel and driven with narrow pulses that alternate in polarity.  Each coil has a pure iron (also heat treated) annulus 90 top and bottom and they are insulated from each other by plastic annuli 80.  When they have a number of these stacks working together the annuli pole pieces 90 are joined to the mating pole pieces in the adjacent stacks

Smudge
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1870
Do you see any orthogonal magnetic fluxes in this scheme ?
Not at the moment but now I know their magnetic configuration I will work up a finite element simulation.

Smudge
   
Full Member
***

Posts: 243
I found a couple more patents natively written in English that might be easier to read / understand.
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1870
Thanks for those patent applications, they are certainly more readable, although not without typos (whoever did the translations has got pole pieces 90 and insulation plates 80 (as in the Korean originals) mixed up number wise).  The significant feature here is that unlike normal transformers the Fe core members are deliberately driven into a semi-permanent magnetized state by short pulses of current.  Normal permament magnetization has a natural demagnetization time of years.  Here they have treated the Fe to have a natural demagnetization time of 1/450 of a second or less.  That is something quite new and allows a system to be derived where alternate states of semi-permanent magnetization are achieved with narrow pulses of current.  During the natural demagnetization (which is thermally driven) the reducing flux in the secondary coils induces voltage to drive current through the load.  That is my take on the new science here.

Smudge
   

Newbie
*

Posts: 44
.
« Last Edit: 2024-01-14, 14:21:16 by Havercake »


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

Posts: 152
Surely you all recognize this AISEG device?

It’s the Buforn patent #57955 from 1914. The main difference is a logic controller instead of a commutator.
Look at the coil arrangements.



---------------------------
'Tis better to try and fail than never try at all
   
Jr. Member
**

Posts: 85
Surely you all recognize this AISEG device?

It’s the Buforn patent #57955 from 1914. The main difference is a logic controller instead of a commutator.
Look at the coil arrangements.

It's hard to say what we see.

Does anyone know how AISEG works? Because I do not know.
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1870
Does anyone know how AISEG works? Because I do not know.
If you look at their patents and the certificates of testing avaiable on their web site they use a series of short duration current pulses fed into a number of primary coils on a complex magnetic core arrangement.  The first certificate quotes a duty cycle of 1.3% on with 98.7% off, and the second certificate quotes 0.5% on with 99.5% off.  The output of the transformer is pseudo AC at 60 Hz.  So this isn't a normal transformer.  How can the transformer fill in the gaps between the pulses to get near a smooth AC waveform?  IMO they use the fact that a narrow pulse can magnetize the core and that magnetization can hold there after the pulse has ended.  How long can it hold?  It can be years as in permanent magnetism.  But SEMP claim they can get the core material to naturally lose its magnetism over a short period of time.  So between the pulses you have naturally decaying magnetism that can be used to induce voltage into a loaded secondary and deliver power to a load.  How much power, how much energy?  The usual answer to that question is that you cannot get out more energy than that required to create the magnetism, i.e. that put in during the narrow driving pulse.  But what is the science behind that answer?  Has this ever been investigated?  This "natural" loss of magnetization is driven by thermal considerations, the magnetically aligned domains gradually lose their alignment due to thermal fluctuations.  Imagine we perform a series of experiments on a transformer having the SEMP core material where we apply a single magnetizing pulse without a load connected, then we connect the load at the end of the pulse and let the decaying magnetization drive current into the load.  We measure input and output energy.  We repeat the experiment with ever decreasing value of load resistor.  Do we reach a point where output energy equals input energy and no more?  Note that the input energy is related to the permeability of the core material, the higher the permeability the lower the energy.  But that may not apply to the output energy.  I am not clever enough to answer this question but I am prepared to accept that SEMP may have the answer (but don't know they do as their explanation for their overunity result is sheer nonsense).

Smudge     
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3377
...the magnetically aligned domains gradually lose their alignment due to thermal . 
What about acoustic fluctuations ?
   
Jr. Member
**

Posts: 85
If you look at their patents and the certificates of testing avaiable on their web site they use a series of short duration current pulses fed into a number of primary coils on a complex magnetic core arrangement.  The first certificate quotes a duty cycle of 1.3% on with 98.7% off, and the second certificate quotes 0.5% on with 99.5% off.  The output of the transformer is pseudo AC at 60 Hz.  So this isn't a normal transformer.  How can the transformer fill in the gaps between the pulses to get near a smooth AC waveform?  IMO they use the fact that a narrow pulse can magnetize the core and that magnetization can hold there after the pulse has ended.  How long can it hold?  It can be years as in permanent magnetism.  But SEMP claim they can get the core material to naturally lose its magnetism over a short period of time.  So between the pulses you have naturally decaying magnetism that can be used to induce voltage into a loaded secondary and deliver power to a load.  How much power, how much energy?  The usual answer to that question is that you cannot get out more energy than that required to create the magnetism, i.e. that put in during the narrow driving pulse.  But what is the science behind that answer?  Has this ever been investigated?  This "natural" loss of magnetization is driven by thermal considerations, the magnetically aligned domains gradually lose their alignment due to thermal fluctuations.  Imagine we perform a series of experiments on a transformer having the SEMP core material where we apply a single magnetizing pulse without a load connected, then we connect the load at the end of the pulse and let the decaying magnetization drive current into the load.  We measure input and output energy.  We repeat the experiment with ever decreasing value of load resistor.  Do we reach a point where output energy equals input energy and no more?  Note that the input energy is related to the permeability of the core material, the higher the permeability the lower the energy.  But that may not apply to the output energy.  I am not clever enough to answer this question but I am prepared to accept that SEMP may have the answer (but don't know they do as their explanation for their overunity result is sheer nonsense).

Smudge   

I've also seen this data.
It used to be the same thing with SR193, if you know its device. Similar to Kapanadze.
He mentions that the magnetic core changes its magnetization by applying short pulses to it. Turns into a generator.
This effect has the basis of stochastic resonance. That's how he explained it.
The core is subjected to a special process of magnetization and demagnetization, causing the magnetic domains to crack. That's what he called it.
If you compare it, it has a lot of similarities.

We also see iron pads in the device. It looks like a magnetic field separator. The function of this may vary. It may be that this slows down the magnetic field or isolates it from impulses or something else.

I see that they produced and even tried to sell these generators in 2021.
   
Jr. Member
**

Posts: 85
What about acoustic fluctuations ?

Vibration supports demagnetization and magnetization.
I checked it personally, but it takes a lot of power to hit the iron core to create a magnetic field.
You can't hear the vibrations, but it is true that the patent mentions vibrations and it is even shown in the drawing. The entire core is screwed tightly. They explain it by the better work of the coils, because the closer they are, the better. We now know it's true.
   
Full Member
***

Posts: 113
Some interesting points made. I enjoy those from smudge.
Contemplating what he says, occurs to me this is nothing more than a dc/dc forward converter with a strange transformer.
Any energy derived from ferromagnetic material during demagnetization surely is less than what was required to magnetize it.
bi
   
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 375
If you look at their patents and the certificates of testing avaiable on their web site they use a series of short duration current pulses fed into a number of primary coils on a complex magnetic core arrangement.  The first certificate quotes a duty cycle of 1.3% on with 98.7% off, and the second certificate quotes 0.5% on with 99.5% off.  The output of the transformer is pseudo AC at 60 Hz.  So this isn't a normal transformer.  How can the transformer fill in the gaps between the pulses to get near a smooth AC waveform?  IMO they use the fact that a narrow pulse can magnetize the core and that magnetization can hold there after the pulse has ended.  How long can it hold?  It can be years as in permanent magnetism.  But SEMP claim they can get the core material to naturally lose its magnetism over a short period of time.  So between the pulses you have naturally decaying magnetism that can be used to induce voltage into a loaded secondary and deliver power to a load.  How much power, how much energy?
I can break down this a bit.
The very short pulses can be used to charge resonant LC circuit(if there is any) but not for causing proper induction directly. Unless I missed something when having materials BH curves in mind. There is minimum time required depending of material to cause induction.
The magnetic memory of material keep magnetized state for period of time. But magnetization decay by itself is not enough to induce any serious amps on coils.
I would go over with magnets and coils relationship but because the coils there are black boxes, no one knows their components.
Ultimately when the claim is over unity it must be looped to prove it and power itself. Otherwise we are down to measurement errors and many other causes of incorrect data.
And if it is real overunity the process caused by catalyst input power must be identified as power source.

Cheers!
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1870
Any energy derived from ferromagnetic material during demagnetization surely is less than what was required to magnetize it.
bi
If you supply a current pulse to deliberately demagnetize the core I would agree with you.  But I am suggesting this is not the case.  The magnetization decays of its own accord over a short time period like 2mS.  That will induce a voltage into a coil hence also current into a load.  What evidence is there for the quantity of energy that can be extracted under this condition?  Has anyone done the experiment?  I have masses of data on the characterisitics of iron but nowhere can I find data on this peculiar non-permanent form of magnetism.  We have permanant magnetism and soft magnetism but nothing in between.  The magnetic field energy stored in the inter-atomic space far exceeds the energy you supply in the magnetizing pulse (F6 will disagree), is it possible that this natural decay of magnetization gives access to that energy?  Can some clever atomic physicist answer the question?

Smudge
   
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 462
Smudge

How about reconnection theory ? Ferrite is soaked with Earth magnetic field , which is then repelled out of the core by  short pulse of external energy source and then reconnection occurs generating excess energy from Earth field.  Radiant energy is produced.
My wild guess....
   
Pages: [1] 2 3 4
« previous next »


 

Home Help Search Login Register
Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u 2024-05-17, 16:51:44