Romerouk's Muller Replication

Home Help Search Login Register

Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.

OverUnity Research > Motors > Muller Generator > Romerouk's Muller Replication

2024-05-05, 18:23:47
News: Forum TIP:
The SHOUT BOX deletes messages after 3 hours. It is NOT meant to have lengthy conversations in. Use the Chat feature instead.

Pages: 1 ... 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 [33] 34 35 36 37

« previous next »

Author Topic: Romerouk's Muller Replication (Read 492396 times)

Peterae	Re: Romerouk's Muller Replication « Reply #800 on: 2011-07-23, 22:22:51 »
Group: Administrator Hero Member Posts: 3867	I did a cop plot and found exactly what some are going through, increase RPM but similar output power to low RPM ect I don't see any point in connecting the converter until i see a situation that my output is big enough to stand a chance, we are at the moment stuck in an infinite loop of alignment

BEP	Re: Romerouk's Muller Replication « Reply #801 on: 2011-07-23, 23:16:13 »
Group: Guest	Quote from: Peterae on 2011-07-23, 22:22:51 I did a cop plot and found exactly what some are going through, increase RPM but similar output power to low RPM ect I don't see any point in connecting the converter until i see a situation that my output is big enough to stand a chance, we are at the moment stuck in an infinite loop of alignment Peter, Just to make sure you know.... My goal, on this project, is not a self-runner or OU. My luck has been pretty bad lately. So I don't expect OU to sneak up behind me. I just wish folks to realize there is a lot more to force & field. It is almost impossible to convince someone that magnets in opposition create a radial magnet field. There is so much more I never see on these forums. If we are to find something extraordinary we need to look beyond the obvious. If there ever is a real free energy machine I have serious doubts it will rely upon some physics law which has been scrubbed clean of the original detail and the math optimized to the point where the old 'assumptions' are zeroed out. This motor, intentional or not, has most of the oddities producible in magnetics. It isn't 'null' in the middle of the core. It is 'Net apparent null' This is why earlier I suggested not adjusting for peak amplitude. At TDC induction should be zero and the flat part is the thin core traveling over the much wider surface of the rotor magnet (or vice-versa). Your best sensor position and alignment should be attained by placing your linear Hall on the outer periphery of the coil's windings. Align the sensor so the poles follow a radial line from the center of the core through the windings. Then adjust your spacings for highest amplitude of the Linear Hall sensor - not the output of the coil. Edit>>> Then your waveform should look exactly like Romero's and the curves will exist for the same reasons, including that little bump (transition) and what you identified as noise.

giantkiller	Re: Romerouk's Muller Replication « Reply #802 on: 2011-07-23, 23:42:13 »
Group: Elite Experimentalist Hero Member Posts: 1575 Frequency equals matter...	Bothers in arms... This aspect is the only thing not readily realized. This is the ghost in the machine. I worked at Keystone transformer as a builder/tester. There was this ballast test that would not only physically vibrate the devices but would resonate your arms and chest. It was the most profound thing i have ever experienced. Is there a standard explanation? Probably. But when you let go you would feel this void. Dansway had me coil two opposing magnets. I now know what this means after Grumpy suggeted the same thing. If i hadn't experienced it myself I would not be agreeing with you. Mystical? Nope and not electrocution either. The factory was a dangerous environment. Quote I just wish folks to realize there is a lot more to force & field. It is almost impossible to convince someone that magnets in opposition create a radial magnet field. There is so much more I never see on these forums. If we are to find something extraordinary we need to look beyond the obvious. If there ever is a real free energy machine I have serious doubts it will rely upon some physics law which has been scrubbed clean of the original detail and the math optimized to the point where the old 'assumptions' are zeroed out. This motor, intentional or not, has most of the oddities producible in magnetics. It isn't 'null' in the middle of the core. It is 'Net apparent null' « Last Edit: 2011-07-24, 00:17:57 by giantkiller » --------------------------- http://purco.qc.ca/ftp/

Mookie	Re: Romerouk's Muller Replication « Reply #803 on: 2011-07-24, 00:01:33 »
Group: Guest	You all might might find this as useful as I have in the past in order to create and view some simple simulations on this very subject. http://www.falstad.com/mathphysics.html ..a good way to visualize ideas. Mookie

EMdevices	Re: Romerouk's Muller Replication « Reply #804 on: 2011-07-24, 16:39:42 »
Hero Member Posts: 805	I finally hooked up the necessary electronic components (hall sensors, MOSFET, etc.) to the motor I'm building, and it runs pretty fast at about 3000 RPM The high speed and the slight imbalance of the rotor combined to produce a very annoying "levitation" effect of the motor across my desk top. Now I need an extra hand to keep it stationary so it won't drift and fall off the table. But here's the crazy thing. The time constant of my coil pair is about 1ms, and one waveform period at 3000 RPM is slightly under 3 ms, with an ON time of about 1.5 ms. At these fast speeds the inductor's magnetic field barely has time to build up, but yet it has plenty of energy in it when it discharges. I have a few energy harvesting circuits in mind that I want to test before I add anymore coils to it. I want to see how much I can do with just one coil pair, both to motorize and to generate, and how efficient I can get it to run. EM « Last Edit: 2011-07-24, 18:59:39 by EMdevices »

Peterae	Re: Romerouk's Muller Replication « Reply #805 on: 2011-07-24, 22:18:21 »
Group: Administrator Hero Member Posts: 3867	Blobs of plastercine or bluetack should do the job

Stevie1001	Re: Romerouk's Muller Replication « Reply #806 on: 2011-07-25, 09:42:20 »
Group: Guest	Like many, i follow this topic with pleasure. RUKOn gave us many directions, but probably left out some. My 2 cents for today is that some of you are focussing to much on the waveform shot. You all have different setups, so scopeshots will differ. Maybe, if i would like to misguide the builders, i would place a nice scopeshot as well..... Meaning, go after your own tests. See what works and what doesn't. Dont hunt a scopeshot, unless your tests show that thats the better direction. Steve

AllPhase	Re: Romerouk's Muller Replication « Reply #807 on: 2011-07-27, 19:44:49 »
Group: Guest	Has anybody seen this Self Running motor: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xbF63Gzvtd4 .

gyula	Re: Romerouk's Muller Replication « Reply #808 on: 2011-07-27, 20:02:31 »
Group: Tech Wizard Hero Member Posts: 1123	Quote from: AllPhase on 2011-07-27, 19:44:49 Has anybody seen this Self Running motor: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xbF63Gzvtd4 He writes in the text uner the video: "...the 1 volt watch battery only serves as a power buffer(instant charge-slow discharge)" So it cannot be said if it runs from the watch battery for a certain time and generator coils helps slowing down the complete discharge of the watch battery OR it really selfruns and the watch battery is a voltage stabilizer to prevent runaway...

penno64	Re: Romerouk's Muller Replication « Reply #809 on: 2011-07-29, 23:16:04 »
Group: Guest	Hi all, While backtracking and thinking about what he was working on prior to the dynamo, I went back throuh the coil shorting thread. I think the answer to the waveform can come from Nilrehob! Penno ------------------------ Romerouk's Muller Replication Coil+shorting+nilrehob.jpg (26.83 kB, 466x424 - viewed 634 times.)

poynt99	Re: Romerouk's Muller Replication « Reply #810 on: 2011-07-30, 04:40:50 »
Group: Administrator Hero Member Posts: 3208 It's not as complicated as it may seem...	Can you elaborate on your thoughts here penno? .99 --------------------------- "Some scientists claim that hydrogen, because it is so plentiful, is the basic building block of the universe. I dispute that. I say there is more stupidity than hydrogen, and that is the basic building block of the universe." Frank Zappa

Grumpy	Re: Romerouk's Muller Replication « Reply #811 on: 2011-07-30, 05:47:43 »
Group: Tinkerer Hero Member Posts: 3947 tExB=qr	Quote from: WaveWatcher on 2011-07-23, 23:16:13 Peter, Just to make sure you know.... My goal, on this project, is not a self-runner or OU. My luck has been pretty bad lately. So I don't expect OU to sneak up behind me. I just wish folks to realize there is a lot more to force & field. It is almost impossible to convince someone that magnets in opposition create a radial magnet field. There is so much more I never see on these forums. If we are to find something extraordinary we need to look beyond the obvious. If there ever is a real free energy machine I have serious doubts it will rely upon some physics law which has been scrubbed clean of the original detail and the math optimized to the point where the old 'assumptions' are zeroed out. This motor, intentional or not, has most of the oddities producible in magnetics. It isn't 'null' in the middle of the core. It is 'Net apparent null' This is why earlier I suggested not adjusting for peak amplitude. At TDC induction should be zero and the flat part is the thin core traveling over the much wider surface of the rotor magnet (or vice-versa). Your best sensor position and alignment should be attained by placing your linear Hall on the outer periphery of the coil's windings. Align the sensor so the poles follow a radial line from the center of the core through the windings. Then adjust your spacings for highest amplitude of the Linear Hall sensor - not the output of the coil. Edit>>> Then your waveform should look exactly like Romero's and the curves will exist for the same reasons, including that little bump (transition) and what you identified as noise. Most magnetic fields vary with distance from the source, which means they are inhomogneous, which means there is an additional force vector perpendicular to the magnetic field vector. Do a little reading and research, you will not get magnetic induction without this inhomogeneous field.

penno64	Re: Romerouk's Muller Replication « Reply #812 on: 2011-07-30, 10:18:30 »
Group: Guest	Sorry Poynt, I thought some of the guys here were chasing this illusive scope trace. Turns out that this was a photo in the coil shorting thread early on (over at OU). It was posted by Conrad but it is from a Youtube by Nilrehob http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=10398.msg276122#msg276122 Nilrehob is around and we can ask questions if we need. He has done some good vids from what I recall. Hope this makes sense now. Penno

Peterae	Re: Romerouk's Muller Replication « Reply #813 on: 2011-07-30, 10:44:10 »
Group: Administrator Hero Member Posts: 3867	How does cutting a flux line not make the flux alter in value, i have shown the flux to be the same under load and unloaded. When the flux line is cut and an electric current is induced in the wire the rotor feels force in the opposite direction to which it was traveling to induce the current in the wire, so the flux line in my mind is just a coupling medium which the coupling strength is dependant how fast the flux line cuts the wire, what if we had a stationary flux line and spin 2 coils one on top of the other but in opposite directions, so each coil cuts the same flux line in opposite directions, surely the coupling torque to the rotor would cancel but the induced current in each coil would still be the same but opposite polarity, or would the coils not see any induced current at all. So what is the result of 2 wires cutting the same flux line in opposite directions at the same time? And how does cutting a flux line couple to the torque of the rotor in the first place, i mean the flux line is not a rigid substance and therefore there has to be a mechanism that allows a coupling of some type, how is the kinetic energy of the rotor being transferred to the wire that cuts the flux line, i am sure that physics describes this in detail so maybe MH or someone else could put me straight on this.

Peterae	Re: Romerouk's Muller Replication « Reply #814 on: 2011-07-30, 11:09:43 »
Group: Administrator Hero Member Posts: 3867	Ah having thought on this some more, with Romero's setup i can already try my idea above, but instead of 2 moving coils i can use the top and bottom coil but connect them in anti series, the result is that no current would flow in the 2 series coils and there would be no torque on the rotor, at least i am pretty sure i already tried this and that was the result. So i have stopped the torque on the rotor by not being able to drain any current from the induced coils even though i have induced voltage across each coil, so then i imagine then that by drawing current from the coil that an opposite magnetic field is setup around the conductor that cuts the flux line, so when a flux induces a current in the conductor there is an opposing field setup in the same conductor which is proportional to the resulting current that is flowing in the conductor. So overunity is simple then, all we need to do is provide current only from a separate source and add this to the induced voltage of each coil in a balanced way between top and bottom coils and we have free energy EDIT so by providing just 1 amp of current from another unrelated source and combining that with the induced voltage of a coil we would get P = I x V P = 1 x 15 = 15 Watts of energy that would not slow the rotor, i know how to get the voltage without current, but how do you get current without voltage, well could this be our new form of induction. Induction current without voltage? i don't think we have a way of measuring this or am i wrong, all our test equipment requires current to pass a resistive loop to enable us to measure it, or is it a case of phasing out the voltage and grabbing the current when the voltage is out of phase. « Last Edit: 2011-07-30, 14:18:53 by Peterae »

Peterae	Re: Romerouk's Muller Replication « Reply #815 on: 2011-07-30, 14:53:42 »
Group: Administrator Hero Member Posts: 3867	I wonder what would happen if i separated the 7 strands i have, connect 2 groups of 3 wires in parallel put these 2 groups in anti series and place a resistor load across each pair, surely this would cancel any torque loading on the rotor but still allow me to draw current from each pair. Sounds a bit like a Tesla bifilar maybe this is what he was trying to tell us.

gyula	Re: Romerouk's Muller Replication « Reply #816 on: 2011-07-30, 15:04:59 »
Group: Tech Wizard Hero Member Posts: 1123	Hi Peterae, Would like to ask if you apply a load also to the the two groups in series? I mean you want to connect the two groups in series, then do you connect a load too across the two series groups? I understand that you load the two groups individually with one-one load.

Peterae	Re: Romerouk's Muller Replication « Reply #817 on: 2011-07-30, 15:32:37 »
Group: Administrator Hero Member Posts: 3867	Hello gyula Interesting question and this shows a hole in what i am saying, because with the coils not connected in anti series but each loaded then which way does the current flow, it would be the same DOH, it's only when they are connected in anti series that a relative direction of current can be made (Well in my mind), this is without a load across the anti series coils but with a load across each coil, not sure if a load resistor is needed across the anti series coil pair and also not sure what the result would be yet, i need to try this just to clear up the mess it's all made of my mind. In short i am confused LOL EDIT having thought about this some more and it takes me a while offcourse the current would be different directions and so they would not need to be connected in anti series as long as each pair had a load resistor, that makes much more sense, sorry for my confusion. So this also stands for the top and bottom coils of the Rom device, the top and bottom coils can be loaded separately, but this brings in an important point the coils must oppose or generate current in opposite directions to counter oppose each other, I've wound my bottom coils in the wrong direction, and this explains why my coil connections are wired in reverse to Rom's video

Grumpy	Re: Romerouk's Muller Replication « Reply #818 on: 2011-07-30, 16:43:22 »
Group: Tinkerer Hero Member Posts: 3947 tExB=qr	Quote from: Peterae on 2011-07-30, 10:44:10 How does cutting a flux line not make the flux alter in value, i have shown the flux to be the same under load and unloaded. When the flux line is cut and an electric current is induced in the wire the rotor feels force in the opposite direction to which it was traveling to induce the current in the wire, so the flux line in my mind is just a coupling medium which the coupling strength is dependant how fast the flux line cuts the wire, what if we had a stationary flux line and spin 2 coils one on top of the other but in opposite directions, so each coil cuts the same flux line in opposite directions, surely the coupling torque to the rotor would cancel but the induced current in each coil would still be the same but opposite polarity, or would the coils not see any induced current at all. So what is the result of 2 wires cutting the same flux line in opposite directions at the same time? And how does cutting a flux line couple to the torque of the rotor in the first place, i mean the flux line is not a rigid substance and therefore there has to be a mechanism that allows a coupling of some type, how is the kinetic energy of the rotor being transferred to the wire that cuts the flux line, i am sure that physics describes this in detail so maybe MH or someone else could put me straight on this. Lorentz Force Law

gyula	Re: Romerouk's Muller Replication « Reply #819 on: 2011-07-30, 16:44:29 »
Group: Tech Wizard Hero Member Posts: 1123	Peterae, I do not know if you are aware of Romero's recent answer to a question on whether his coils were in adding or cancelling connection but here it is what he wrote: http://underservice.org/index.php?topic=6.msg213#msg213

Peterae	Re: Romerouk's Muller Replication « Reply #820 on: 2011-07-30, 16:59:36 »
Group: Administrator Hero Member Posts: 3867	Thank you gyula, no not been looking there. and thankyou Grumpy.

Grumpy	Re: Romerouk's Muller Replication « Reply #821 on: 2011-07-30, 21:59:55 »
Group: Tinkerer Hero Member Posts: 3947 tExB=qr	Quote from: Peterae on 2011-07-30, 16:59:36 Thank you gyula, no not been looking there. and thankyou Grumpy. You are most welcome. It works because forces transfer momentum.

Peterae	Re: Romerouk's Muller Replication « Reply #822 on: 2011-07-31, 10:58:28 »
Group: Administrator Hero Member Posts: 3867	Cheers Grumpy. I really cannot appreciate how clever you theory guys are, the theory on this is overweeningly complex from a physics point of view for someone like me to understand. I now see that no matter which way a current is induced there will be torque to reduce the motor speed, and that it's the opposing currents that nullify in the bucking configuration and hence we get no net gain in a balanced 2 coil system. And the only way to stop the torque is to apply current which then gives us a motor. Still trying to get my head round this, but it appears to me that a magnetic field is infact equivalent to current without voltage, and the electric field is voltage without current. What i need is an accelerometer to monitor the conversion of induced current versus torque, trouble is this needs mounting on a rotating rotor and at the moment i cannot see a way of doing this, this would enable me to compare the induced current against torque( maybe someone has already done this and theres already data)

Grumpy	Re: Romerouk's Muller Replication « Reply #823 on: 2011-07-31, 16:42:49 »
Group: Tinkerer Hero Member Posts: 3947 tExB=qr	Quote from: Peterae on 2011-07-31, 10:58:28 Cheers Grumpy. I really cannot appreciate how clever you theory guys are, the theory on this is overweeningly complex from a physics point of view for someone like me to understand. I now see that no matter which way a current is induced there will be torque to reduce the motor speed, and that it's the opposing currents that nullify in the bucking configuration and hence we get no net gain in a balanced 2 coil system. And the only way to stop the torque is to apply current which then gives us a motor. Still trying to get my head round this, but it appears to me that a magnetic field is infact equivalent to current without voltage, and the electric field is voltage without current. What i need is an accelerometer to monitor the conversion of induced current versus torque, trouble is this needs mounting on a rotating rotor and at the moment i cannot see a way of doing this, this would enable me to compare the induced current against torque( maybe someone has already done this and theres already data) No ordinary run of the mill permanent magnet generator is ever going to produce excess energy. You typical magnet always produces a mirror image and no net gain. We have to look into the process of induction. Current produces the magnetic field, the magnetic field is not current, it is just polarized space. A current polarizes space and it transfers the momentum. What is space, and how can it transfer momentum? Does space have momentum itself, can it store momentum, can it magnify momentum applied to it? Look at a simple bar magnet in a coil that you move to induce current. You have the force vector of the magnetic field, another for the magnet in motion, and the hidden one that everyone ignores is perpendicular to both of the other two because magnetic fields decrease in strength (distance cubed).

Peterae	Re: Romerouk's Muller Replication « Reply #824 on: 2011-07-31, 16:52:34 »
Group: Administrator Hero Member Posts: 3867	Quote and how can it transfer momentum? Indeed this is quiet mind bending stuff, question is how can we test to see whats going on. The first thing i can think of is to map the change in momentum and see how it is phased in relation to the induced current and the phase of the magnetic field. Break the momentum link and we are on a home run. Anyone got any experiment ideas to unravel this? I wish i could find a way of monitoring the change in velocity, but i am unable to place an accelerometer on the rotor and i cannot connect a tacho to my bearing shaft because it's fixed.

Pages: 1 ... 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 [33] 34 35 36 37

« previous next »

Home Help Search Login Register

Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u

2024-05-05, 18:23:47

SMF 2.0.18 | SMF © 2021, Simple Machines
XHTML
RSS
WAP2