OverUnity Research

Chet was hot to post this, so I figured we ought to discuss and maybe do some building of a generator that lacks the Lenz Law effect.

First start with this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SqWU12Db_MY

Then read this:
http://www.google.com/patents/US5191258

And this:
http://u2.lege.net/newebmasters.com__freeenergy/external_links_from_theverylastpageoftheinternet.com/ElectromagneticDev/olafberens/olaf.htm


My hope is that OU will soon be a done deal, only a matter of the easiest and cheapest way to modify an off-the-shelf generator.

Matt

more info today
here

http://www.overunity.com/15088/new-generator-no-effect-lenzlaw-give-more-detail-in-pcture/msg423163/#new

and I did start a topic here too
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/19851-topic-new-generator-no-effect-counter-b-emf-part-2-selfrunning.html#post267026

Seems right up Smudge's alley ??

Thx
Chet

Hi Matt,

This is the biggest BEMF project I did a year ago.

I'm using a pulse pwm of dc current into a low resistance coil to collect the BEMF and to run a dc motor, this is then turning a generator to produce  about 500 watts of output power.

BEMF happens best when their is a load.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2xLwBaub4lc&list=UUp3mD3EJromKns3YpglKdpA

Tom

Dear All.

Don't they make it look simple, I want one of those !!  :)

The name Kromrey converter comes straight to mind and the device also smacks of the Polar Inductor Magneto developed for aviation ignition !!

I wonder if that Youtube demo was real ? If it was, I really do want one !!  :)

Cheers Grum.

This simply seems so easy in concept, I can't imagine how any of us missed it.

So if I have an air gap between a magnet and a coil and I pass a piece of iron in between to close up the air gap, I can actually generate electricity without any Lenz Effect being imposed on the movement of the iron?  That just seems too simple to believe.


In the attached image, can anyone tell me what the "Holder magnet" is?   All the other parts I understand just fine.

My initial thought was that he just cut away the outer edge of the rotor, mounted those pieces to an end cap, locked the rest of the rotor in-place and connected the end cap to the input shaft.  So what you end up with is a rotor that is now fixed in-place and only the interrupter (end cap and sections of cut-away rotor) still spin.

Oh and Tom, I already looked at my Harbor Freight generator and there isn't enough room in there to be cutting on the rotor.  We need something else.  A source for that cheap Chinese 4-pole generator shown in the video would be a good find at this point in time.

Quote from: Chet K on 2014.11.11, 14:13:15
Seems right up Smudge's alley ??

When I look at Smudge's paper "Towards a self-running magnetic motor" (http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=2621.0;attach=15286), I can't help but see an inversion of this principal.  Instead of the Reflection Plane being fixed and the rotation happening on both sides, with this device I see just the opposite happening.  Which makes sense since this is a generator instead of a motor.

Quote from: Matt Watts on 2014.11.11, 14:47:30
This simply seems so easy in concept, I can't imagine how any of us missed it.

So if I have an air gap between a magnet and a coil and I pass a piece of iron in between to close up the air gap, I can actually generate electricity without any Lenz Effect being imposed on the movement of the iron?  That just seems too simple to believe.


In the attached image, can anyone tell me what the "Holder magnet" is?   All the other parts I understand just fine.

My initial thought was that he just cut away the outer edge of the rotor, mounted those pieces to an end cap, locked the rest of the rotor in-place and connected the end cap to the input shaft.  So what you end up with is a rotor that is now fixed in-place and only the interrupter (end cap and sections of cut-away rotor) still spin.

Oh and Tom, I already looked at my Harbor Freight generator and there isn't enough room in there to be cutting on the rotor.  We need something else.  A source for that cheap Chinese 4-pole generator shown in the video would be a good find at this point in time.

Dear Matt.

I don't think anyone missed anything, as I pointed out earlier the concept has been around a very long time. Perhaps what has been missed is the Lenzless bit !!

As to your question my gut tells me that it is the Soft Iron carrier for the permanent magnets. I really appreciate you posting that diagram as I can now see how the permanent magnet field is held stationary whilst the rotor spins. This was not very apparent on the You tube video I watched earlier.

Of course we must not forget that the construction of this device would have to be of very close tolerance. Any air gap of appreciable size would most certainly ruin the machines efficiency drastically.

Cheers Grum.

High Matt

quote:- In the attached image, can anyone tell me what the "Holder magnet" is?   All the other parts I understand just fine.

Being a non English person then you need to swop around the words to "magnet holder" ;) here in Spain it is car red and not red car ;D the adjective is after and not before.

regards

Mike 8)

Quote from: Centraflow on 2014.11.11, 17:41:36
Being a non English person then you need to swop around the words to "magnet holder" ;) here in Spain it is car red and not red car ;D the adjective is after and not before.

Thanks Mike.  That makes sense.

So there is nothing magical in this thing then.

The tolerances need to be at least as good as the original generator, so any cuts made to the core should be as small as possible--wire EDM me thinks.


Okay, so those outside stator windings that will never receive direct flux from central core,  Are they still necessary?  If so, they would then be the key to this device being Lenzless.  Again, this would make sense in respect to Eric Dollard's "Four Quadrant Representation of Electricity".

I really don't see any other way to fully engage the mystery here short of an actual replication attempt, staying within the confines of what we have seen in the video.  Probably going to be a bit expensive and tedious, but I think someone needs to do it.  If I can find a source for that generator, I'll take a shot at it.

  Interesting ~ the vid maker notes,

Quoteif u want more detail design, pls send me mesge " syairalamsyahrazab@yahoo.co.id " SALAM

Has anyone emailed him yet?
Edit:  evidently the detail is available on the ou.com thread that Chet posted...

@ All
Email did go thru this time .
of course will post all here.
thx
Chet

I did not see a tag on the actual running generator, but the one he is working on has this.

If anyone can decipher it, that would sure be helpful.  Kind of bothers me the yellow logo appears blotted out in every frame, almost like it has been Photoshopped  (Hmmm...).

It's possible this is the generator we are looking at in the video, only a newer model under a renamed manufacturer:
http://mindumotor.en.made-in-china.com/productimage/qSdEWxAcZPkN-2f1j00DjfaevsgLKkA/China-100-Copper-Wire-2kw-75kw-St-Stc-Alternator-Prices-with-ISO9001-Certificate.html

Lasersaber did ask if this was the same genny
http://www.ebay.com/itm/10KW-ST-Generator-Head-1-Phase-for-Diesel-or-Gas-Engine-60Hz-/331362857668?pt=BI_Generators&hash=item4d26c3f2c4

?
no answer yet
thx
Chet

Getting closer:

http://www.alibaba.com/product-detail/ST-STC-series-Single-three-phase_405415884.html

Takes a month for delivery, but you can pick out whatever flavor you like.



Also, here's a pick of the stock rotor:
(http://utterpower.com/images/ST%20Heads/rotor1.jpg)

Quote from: Centraflow on 2014.11.11, 17:41:36

Being a non English person then you need to swop around the words to "magnet holder" ;) here in Spain it is car red and not red car ;D the adjective is after and not before.

regards

Mike 8)

Sounds Yoda

Quote from: TinMan on 2014.11.12, 12:01:35
Sounds Yoda

Yeah until you get used to it after speeking the language for 25 years, English being my first O0

regards

Mike 8)

Quote from: TinMan on 2014.11.12, 12:01:35
Sounds Yoda

Does it, yes.

By the way TinMan, here's an opinion about this device by someone that knows the innards of these generators like the back of his hands.

http://www.utterpower.com/november-13-2014-email-of-the-day/

FWIW...

Food for Thought

"Flight by machines heavier than air is unpractical and insignificant, if not utterly impossible."
Simon Newcomb

"If we knew what it was we were doing, it would not be called research, would it?"
Albert Einstein

"I canna change the laws of physics, Captain — but I can find ye a loophole."
Montgomery Scott

"I have not failed. I've just found 10,000 ways that won't work."
Thomas A. Edison

"You may be disappointed if you fail, but you are doomed if you don't try."
Beverly Sills

"It's kind of fun to do the impossible."
Walt Disney

Quote from: Matt Watts on 2014.11.13, 21:14:41
Does it, yes.

By the way TinMan, here's an opinion about this device by someone that knows the innards of these generators like the back of his hands.

http://www.utterpower.com/november-13-2014-email-of-the-day/

FWIW...

I posted a comment to utterpower as follows:

QuoteHmmm... I have to disagree, unless you are SURE that there are NO untapped sources of energy yet to be discovered and tapped.

  I'm not voting for free-lunch energy.  But rather for - tapping untapped energy.
Can you see the difference?

For example, my friend, how about cold-fusion (better called LENR) of the HOH - nickel type?  e-cat and Iwamura and Celani and Jones and all that?
Are you saying that LENR is impossible?  if so, how can you be so sure?

PS - not that this generator device has any LENR in it; I'm not saying that.  Just speaking of your ruling out novel freedom-energy devices in general - that's what I disagree with.
Cheers.

  Pls let me know if he responds

"You must unlearn what you have learned."

- Yoda

"Size matters not. Look at me. Judge me by my size, do you? Hmm? Hmm. And well you should not. For my ally is the Force, and a powerful ally it is. Life creates it, makes it grow. Its energy surrounds us and binds us. Luminous beings are we, not this crude matter. You must feel the Force around you; here, between you, me, the tree, the rock, everywhere, yes. Even between the land and the ship."

- Yoda

Quote from: lost_bro on 2014.11.14, 02:23:21
Good Evening All:

I offer this as food for thought:

Tesla Patent #390,721

You will note that using a Quadrature generated field and *4* poles, the armature (rotor) will rotate.

This technique is used to rotate a motor with said field *and* with same technique to generate the rotating (quadrature) field.......

Only *4* poles, but the fields (magnetic) generated propagate, following the sine wave(s) of the rotating field. O0


Take care, peace
lost_bro

Quote from: xsyw9998 on 2014.11.13, 22:43:25
Food for Thought

"Flight by machines heavier than air is unpractical and insignificant, if not utterly impossible."
Simon Newcomb

"If we knew what it was we were doing, it would not be called research, would it?"
Albert Einstein

"I canna change the laws of physics, Captain — but I can find ye a loophole."
Montgomery Scott

"I have not failed. I've just found 10,000 ways that won't work."
Thomas A. Edison

"You may be disappointed if you fail, but you are doomed if you don't try."
Beverly Sills

"It's kind of fun to do the impossible."
Walt Disney

Quote: "Flight by machines heavier than air is unpractical and insignificant, if not utterly impossible."
Simon Newcomb
Only because he knew no better. All he had to do is look up into the sky and see heaver than air birds flying around-no magic in flying machines to be had-->nothing more than a lack of knowledge at the time.

Quote: "If we knew what it was we were doing, it would not be called research, would it?"
Albert Einstein

Because of the research we have done,we can spot a fake a mile away.
TinMan.

Quote: I canna change the laws of physics, Captain — but I can find ye a loophole."
Montgomery Scott

Not good enough Mr Scott.
Jame's T Kirk

Quote: I have not failed. I've just found 10,000 ways that won't work."
Thomas A. Edison

Now 10,001.

Quote: "You may be disappointed if you fail, but you are doomed if you don't try."
Beverly Sills
And forgiven for falling victim to deceit.

Guy's

I would not shoot this down to soon, I thought I would throw together a simple setup just to see what is what.

I was not expecting to have a self runner ;D  just a means of seeing the cogging and the ability to generate and to see if shorting created drag.

I have had some surprises ???

Heavy cogging when you start to turn but goes away with just a little speed.(after one revolution)

Shorting does not drag down the generator.

Hope to give you a video tomorrow, this was all thrown together in about an hour ;D

regards

Mike 8)

Quote from: Centraflow on 2014.11.16, 19:13:14
Hope to give you a video tomorrow, this was all thrown together in about an hour ;D

I was not expecting to have a self runner

Looking forward to it Mike.

UFO Politics put together some impressive images to look at that I have attached.  He is pretty convinced it's the real deal and I wouldn't be surprised too if he has thrown something together that makes him feel that way.

If you do have a self-runner, please enter it in the Pulse Motor Build Off.  There would be no better place to leak something like this out.

Hi All thanks to Chet & Brad for welcoming me here. I was mucking about on the weekend testing the principle of this device. I must be missing something because I get about 10x the power by passing a mag over a coil than what I do passing iron between the mag and the coil. Obviously I'd like this to be the real thing but if it is I am missing something.. which would not be unusual :)  :D

Jim
welcome to the forum
Have always enjoyed your Zeal as well as you contributions .

Respectfully
Chet
ps
You have a message [top of page]

BTW here is the test video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_rFqCtqM9d8

Quote from: Chet K on 2014.11.17, 02:49:23
Jim
welcome to the forum
Have always enjoyed your Zeal as well as you contributions .

Respectfully
Chet
ps
You have a message [top of page]

Thanks mate, found them and replied.. I think.

Welcome to the forum Jim O0

I think you have got it wrong, the iron segments are independant of one another. I thought as you to start with ;)

If I can get the video together today then you will see, no self runner as it was not expected due to the generator power from the onset.

This was just to prove to me if there was something in this, the build has cost me nothing, only time, it is all I had in the junk box ;D

regards

Mike 8)

PS I don't think this will generate more power, infact it will generate a little less, what it does do is to remove most of the drag from the BEMF as power is taken off.

Quote from: Centraflow on 2014.11.17, 09:00:24
Welcome to the forum Jim O0

I think you have got it wrong, the iron segments are independant of one another. I thought as you to start with ;)

If I can get the video together today then you will see, no self runner as it was not expected due to the generator power from the onset.

This was just to prove to me if there was something in this, the build has cost me nothing, only time, it is all I had in the junk box ;D

regards

Mike 8)



PS I don't think this will generate more power, infact it will generate a little less, what it does do is to remove most of the drag from the BEMF as power is taken off.

Buoyed to hear I missed something crucial. Don't understand the science behind it though. Looking forward to seeing your rig

Hi All up loading the video now, it will take a while as I have a very slow connection "1Mb".

The video quality is low as I have used a web cam.

Where I said a copper tube it should have been a plastic tube, sorry about that.

Below is a scope shot of the output.

Current draw was 250ma and 7.1v

Output was 1.49v AC @ 11.5ma

Remember that this is not to show more out than in, but to see if there was drag when shorted, and that it could generate power at all.

I think that if the generator was sized right and the drive motor was just the size to turn the generator at the right speed, then having no drag it could be looped.

The voltage and current on this trial could be increased with reducing the spacing I had, which was quite large and a little irregular.

The other interesting thing is the high cogging when you turn slowly, it is really very strong, but once running at a little speed it seems to reduce to very little.

Will post the link when loaded

regards

Mike 8)

Look at the output wave form, now is that telling us something about why the BEMF is reduced???

I'm not really a motor man, so those that are please look O0

regards

Mike 8)

Wow 2hrs to upload this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M0WkZhCHyI8&feature=youtu.be

regards

Mike 8)

Quote from: Centraflow on 2014.11.17, 18:05:06
Wow 2hrs to upload this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M0WkZhCHyI8&feature=youtu.be

regards

Mike 8)

Dear Mike.

If I wore a hat, hate them !! I would take it off for you !!

Elegantly simple and yet a wonderful proof of concept. I daren't post a picture of my sorry attempt !! I tried to create a disc with lamina soldered around the edges unfortunately the 20x20x30 mm Neo magnet just wrecked it within seconds !! Cogging was immense but as you say it kind of eases as the speed increases.

Your simple design might just benefit from some slightly thicker lamina I will endeavour to copy it and see what happens, just love it !!  ;)

Cheers Grum.

Thanks Grum

You are right about a thicker laminate, I have just put one extra layer and the voltage has gone up to 2.3v from 1.47v.

I still have a big space left. If it was down to 1mm either side of the laminate iron then I would say the voltage would be around 8-9v.

The output wave has gone to nearly a perfect sine and frequency is 159hz

regards

mike 8)

Just noticed now that with the extra laminate the input current has gone down by 25ma

regards

Mike 8)

Quote from: Centraflow on 2014.11.17, 18:54:03
Thanks Grum

You are right about a thicker laminate, I have just put one extra layer and the voltage has gone up to 2.3v from 1.47v.

I still have a big space left. If it was down to 1mm either side of the laminate iron then I would say the voltage would be around 8-9v.

The output wave has gone to nearly a perfect sine and frequency is 159hz

regards

mike 8)

Hi,

I just seen your video and would like to add some information. There is effect called "Wesley Gary Magnetic Effect" which basically manifests on soft iron between same pole magnets being pushed towards each other. There is critical distance where magnetic flipping occurs and it is going from deflection to attraction mode. This is critical point for magnetic field switching generator and way around Lenz law.. http://www.keelynet.com/energy/gary.htm

In quick conversation with Grumage I made a rough drawing which might help.

P.S> Without soft iron on rotor in middle the magnetic field on coil should be very weak and with soft iron it should be very strong...

Cheers!

Sorry!

Dear Wattsup.

I think the design has more to do with this gentleman's motor !!   ;)

http://www.rexresearch.com/gary/gary1.htm

Cheers Grum.

Quote from: wattsup on 2014.11.17, 20:28:48
@T1000

There is more to it then that.

@Centralflow

Since the magnets are not moving, only your laminate is moving, all you are doing is producing a slight fluctuation of the same polarities against the same coil winds, SO NO CHANGE possible in the coil cores. That is not a good idea when the name of the game is change. Hitting a coil with the same polarity will only align the coil copper atoms once, and hence your very low output on your 4 coils.

With proper arrangement they have good  induction as magnets moving through coils. The main problem in all conventional generators is, the magnet has to get to the coil and away from the coil and this is source of the problem.
All we need there is by http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faraday%27s_law_of_induction and that can be magnetized and demagnetized iron between coil and magnet. Also the generator coils become electromagnets under load so you have treat it as same pole magnet when magnetic field is increasing and opposite when it is weakening. So at this point we have all basic parts and with the proper arrangement of spacing between moving iron (which is only temporary magnet for a coil) and coils/magnet you can get away from cogging when generator coil is shorted...


P.S> We are on chat at the moment ;) And I suggest to see http://youtu.be/vtsHmE7_HDQ?t=55s

This solid state version may work. When the toroid is saturated, then no
magnet field will be transferred to the L2 core. Just an idea...............

Quote from: Groundloop on 2014.11.17, 21:21:05
This solid state version may work. When the toroid is saturated, then no
magnet field will be transferred to the L2 core. Just an idea...............

Electromagnetic switching? In that case it should be away from magnetic circuit loop path!
The 90 degrees on junction between coil and magnet...

P.S> It is a bit deviation from original posts...

Hi Mike,
Thanks for that. What a great little design. I'm assuming those coils are wrapped around the same core that came with the fan?

Sorry!

Quote from: JimBoot on 2014.11.17, 23:11:02
Hi Mike,
Thanks for that. What a great little design. I'm assuming those coils are wrapped around the same core that came with the fan?

Hi Jim

They are the same, just reconnected in opposite pairs and then externally connected in series. If I could have had the soft iron laminates reducing the gap to 1mm then it would have generated a lot lot more, I am slowly adding more and the voltage is going up in leaps and bounds. Tomorrow I will see if I can cut some others, the speed is not fast, judging by the frequency 160hz I would say 640rpm. naturally by increasing input voltage the output voltage goes up, but that is not what I want, only the max at low input.

@ wattsup

This is an attempt at what this thread was started for, it's a copy of the principle in the Indonesian video of a self runner, the rotor only being the soft iron. Still a ways to go but I think it has merit and is what I wanted to do before spending time on a bigger generator.

@ Tinman

One of your smart drive motors would be a very good tender for this and not hard to make O0

regards

Mike 8)

Been too busy to do much building lately but wanted to share something I tore apart a while back as it looks like it might have some potential for use in experimenting with this idea.... Maybe.   It's out of an old record player and says Fujiya Audio on the motor.  I'm still looking for the other half.   I think the outside is aluminum as it's not magnetic.   It currently has only 3 magnets in it but looks like it would be easy to epoxy or even bolt some more in there by just drilling through the outside case if you have some magnets with center holes.    Nice work Mike on the fan mod.  So far I don't see any reason to think the original guy doing this with that big motor is trying to fool anybody.    Best of luck on this path...

Hello All

This is a re-post from O.U.com:

Quote from: hanon on 2014.11.17, 15:55:19
The original Youtube video, which initially was 37:47 min, has been edited and now is only 25 minutes. A copy of the original video is in FreeEnergyLT Youtube Channel

We hope the next video will be better to prove or disprove this technology

Regards

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DKUFoWAuj0&list=UUaKHAdY13gp-un2hn_HJehg

It shows the generator at one point elevated on a makeshift Clutch housing/re-bar platform.  Sure looks convincing........

take care, peace
lost_bro

Need some brains here with this one.  I just stumbled across it tonight.  If there is anything to it, this could potentially kick the door wide open.


Get out google translate and try a few experiments.

QuoteThe existence of longitudinal force is contrary to the laws of electrodynamics. This force is the result of the scalar magnetic field present at the site of cut magnets. Such a composite magnet called SIBERIAN COLIA.

Just uploading my vid now. I went and bought an ac cooling fan thanks to Mike. My cogging is so strong I did not have a motor that would run it . I used a drill instead. I just wanted to share what I did and thank Mike. I got it up to just over 5 v but ineed more coils and mags. It's only two pole ATM.

Ok here is the vid http://youtu.be/o4_gEo2_hrg

Quote from: JimBoot on 2014.11.18, 10:12:34
Just uploading my vid now. I went and bought an ac cooling fan thanks to Mike. My cogging is so strong I did not have a motor that would run it . I used a drill instead. I just wanted to share what I did and thank Mike. I got it up to just over 5 v but ineed more coils and mags. It's only two pole ATM.

To get away from issue you need elevation which allows small force to run things like this. The most simple option is large pulley on generator like in original video with small pulley on motor connected by belt.
This also require more pieces of soft iron on rotor but this is manageable with proper generator design.

Quote from: Matt Watts on 2014.11.18, 08:52:34
Need some brains here with this one.  I just stumbled across it tonight.  If there is anything to it, this could potentially kick the door wide open.


Get out google translate and try a few experiments.

That device was developed by a physicist named Stephan Marinov.  He later developed a much more interesting device termed the MAGVID, which used a rotating magnetic field to create a strong vortex (with a biasing field outside from another coil).  This device is supposed to have produced a beam out the center just like a pulsar when operated around 30 MHz.

It seems that some have not got the idea of how this was done, here is my drawing of my experimental setup which I am now implimenting narrower gaps which is important to get a higher output.

The iron of the rotor should be the same width as the iron of the stator coils also.

To also increase output bigger coils should be used.

regards

Mike 8)

Quote from: Grumpy on 2014.11.18, 14:59:50
That device was developed by a physicist named Stephan Marinov.  He later developed a much more interesting device termed the MAGVID, which used a rotating magnetic field to create a strong vortex (with a biasing field outside from another coil).  This device is supposed to have produced a beam out the center just like a pulsar when operated around 30 MHz.

This blew me away the first time I saw it. I assume it is the same man ??

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZkGjjWzOD20

Cheers Grum.

Quote from: Grumage on 2014.11.18, 17:58:50
This blew me away the first time I saw it. I assume it is the same man ??

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZkGjjWzOD20

Cheers Grum.

Yeah, that's him.  He supposedly committed suicide by jumping off a stairway, but there is some speculation that he was terminated as he was at a symposium and planning to demonstrate his MAGVID device, proving that aether vortices exist...

EDIT:
That is where you all should be looking, in my humble opinion.

Quote from: Grumpy on 2014.11.18, 19:45:20
Yeah, that's him.  He supposedly committed suicide by jumping off a stairway, but there is some speculation that he was terminated as he was at a symposium and planning to demonstrate his MAGVID device, proving that aether vortices exist...

EDIT:
That is where you all should be looking, in my humble opinion.

http://blog.lege.net/Mathias_Bage/GLCRA-MAGVID-annotated.pdf and http://redshift.vif.com/JournalFiles/Pre2001/V05NO3PDF/v05n3phi.pdf ?

That is worth entire separate thread to keep this one focused on magnetic field switching.....

Quote from: T-1000 on 2014.11.18, 21:02:21
http://blog.lege.net/Mathias_Bage/GLCRA-MAGVID-annotated.pdf and http://redshift.vif.com/JournalFiles/Pre2001/V05NO3PDF/v05n3phi.pdf ?

That is worth entire separate thread to keep this one focused on magnetic field switching.....

New MAGVID thread:
http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=2686.msg43192#msg43192

I don't understand - video to come but I am getting 15v AC by putting a coil on the opposite side of the mags from where the steel passes. So the mags are between the steel and the coil. No idea about current yet

Ok I think my small coil on the outside is getting around 10v but in microamp range as it will not light the LED. However the bigger gauge coils on the outside light the LED and get around 3v so I'm guessing they are in milliamps at least. I think I'll put 4 bigguns on the outside to get 12v then start to run some tests on current.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fSIYmq6W_d0

Here's the one with the bigass coil lighting the LED https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jknKSEDtA5M

Quote from: JimBoot on 2014.11.19, 09:53:41
Here's the one with the bigass coil lighting the LED https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jknKSEDtA5M

One of things you might to try:

If you fix magnets in the center then have soft iron on rotor in 1mm distance from magnet then you can play around with all sorts of coils for hitting Garry magnetic effect on variable distance between iron and coil. The voltage and current will be much higher in outer casing than inner casing placements due simple fact of circular speed movement between coil and iron core which also becomes temporary magnet....
Also to win over cogging between magnet and moving iron core you will need pulley for mechanical leverage effect which will increase torque in expense of spinning speed (so more coils/magnets/iron cores will be needed for same frequency).
Obviously the fan motor casing won't fit these and you will need something else for assembly base...

Cheers!

Thanks T. Got a motor and pulley hooked up. As expected adding two more steels has increased voltage by 50%. No more mags or coils yet. Uploading vid now.

Here's the latest test http://youtu.be/_zZHFLx4rZg as described abowe

Quote from: JimBoot on 2014.11.20, 09:45:07
Here's the latest test http://youtu.be/_zZHFLx4rZg as described abowe

Nice one  :)

Just when you have coil in another side of magnet it gets weaker effect as moving magnetic field extends and shrinks more on the iron side.
Also the as I said before, the coils in center are getting less power by lower radial speed in center of circle than on outer casing.
If you got another big burned fan motor then placing magnets instead of coils in center and coils on outer casing would get you perfect arrangement.
This can be easily done by cutting center core to the minimum size for holding magnets and leaving out distance between spinning cores and magnets less than 2mm.
The relationship of distance between magnet and coil is parabolic so most power can be gained when the distance is very small.
For W. Gary magnetic effect you still have to find sweet spot between spinning core and coil where spinning core appears in the neutral zone (bloch wall) between shorted coil and magnet.

(http://www.keelynet.com/energy/garyp1-1.gif)

Cheers!

Hi All,

Holding off posting more at the moment as I have found an interesting phenomina which needs more investigation and a little build if I can find the things I want in my scrap box ;D

regards

Mike 8)

Ironically the crucial thing that made the whole thing go, broke- the rubber band. So no more for tonight. I did observe  a behaviour that I hadnt seen before.

I removed the centre coil and replaced it with mags with same poles facing the external mags. So I still only had mags at 180deg to each other like the last video but now I had two mags on the inside of the rotor with same poles facing. When I  had the coil in the same place as the last vid I only got 2.5v however if I put it underneath the motor or above it perpendicular to the motor I got 4-5v. I then proceeded to install another two sets of mags so I now had four sets external and four sets internal. The pick up coil best position then returned to the side of the motor rather thn on top or below.

Just a quick update. Keep breaking the belt so no vids. I did however replace the holder of the internal mag holder. It was a piece of plastic tube now it is a piece of metal tubing. It tripled the voltage on my big ass coil. I'm assuming to get the amps up I need to use a heavier gauge coil. Does it matter though? Pardon my ignorance. The issue is total power output. I've tripled the voltage on the bigass and a coil I have taken from a dynamo out of a bike The bike coil now gets just under 2v. I haven't measured amps but would the wats from both coils be the same? I'm trying to work out if I should be winding new coils that maximise total wattage

Quote from: JimBoot on 2014.11.22, 09:19:26
Just a quick update. Keep breaking the belt so no vids. I did however replace the holder of the internal mag holder. It was a piece of plastic tube now it is a piece of metal tubing. It tripled the voltage on my big ass coil. I'm assuming to get the amps up I need to use a heavier gauge coil. Does it matter though? Pardon my ignorance. The issue is total power output. I've tripled the voltage on the bigass and a coil I have taken from a dynamo out of a bike The bike coil now gets just under 2v. I haven't measured amps but would the wats from both coils be the same? I'm trying to work out if I should be winding new coils that maximise total wattage

Watts is volts x amp's-more volt's,less amp's or more amps,less volts. More heat created by a higher current though,so i would stick to a higher voltage,lower current. At the end of the day,the power avaliable is all up to the amount and strength of magnetic flux cutting the conductive windings-so wire size really dosnt change P/out total if the magnetic field strength isnt there to up the power output with the larger wire.

Quote from: TinMan on 2014.11.22, 09:28:51
Watts is volts x amp's-more volt's,less amp's or more amps,less volts. More heat created by a higher current though,so i would stick to a higher voltage,lower current. At the end of the day,the power avaliable is all up to the amount and strength of magnetic flux cutting the conductive windings-so wire size really dosnt change P/out total if the magnetic field strength isnt there to up the power output with the larger wire.

Thanks Brad. That's what I needed to know. With the current setup in theory I could get 45v . I think it would be less than 100ma though.

Here is my concept of using W. Gary magnetic effect in generator, hopefuly it is self explanationatory:

Quote from: T-1000 on 2014.11.22, 22:35:38
Here is my concept of using W. Gary magnetic effect in generator, hopefuly it is self explanationatory:

I think the concept is correct but the dimensions of the iron bar in your diagram seems too long.  I think this would need to be shortened to avoid serious cogging action when the iron bar is exactly centered within the two opposing field magnets.  Either that or the magnets themselves should be much closer together.

The other option would be to have all the iron bars spaced apart in such a way that the net cogging force is neutralized.  Keep in mind all of these iron bars are fixed together with a common bracket.  The idea here is similar to the RomeroUK device with 8 stators and 9 rotors.  So for every iron bar that is centered, there are other ones pulling and pushing to balance out the net effect to zero.

I'll post a vid a bit later but I can say that getting just one of my rotor irons about a mm away from the mag saw a 33% increase in voltage. Now at 20v

Hopefully you'll see this in the video but the voltage pickup is greatest when the coil is midwayy between 2 mags. So half way between a N&S

just cracked 100v with a diff coil positioning. still just one coil

Here's the earlier vid https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ya3JmneZIVQ I have since recorded another getting up over 100v now with a single coil. Thanks Arunas for the links and images.

The magnetic forces have to be balanced in my design like on Muller dynamo and that give advantages for applying small force only to turn iron blades between magnets and coils. The magnetic interaction between iron bars changing magnetic poles and coils still need experiments to see outcome but that should not cause too much drag. Also as Jimboot just posted the coil position is best between two magnetic poles so the rest should be not too hard for figuring out the final generator design.

Cheers!

Here's the 100v video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NrZhCw5EAhY

Quote from: T-1000 on 2014.11.23, 09:14:38
The magnetic forces have to be balanced in my design like on Muller dynamo and that give advantages for applying small force only to turn iron blades between magnets and coils. The magnetic interaction between iron bars changing magnetic poles and coils still need experiments to see outcome but that should not cause too much drag. Also as Jimboot just posted the coil position is best between two magnetic poles so the rest should be not too hard for figuring out the final generator design.

Cheers!

Hi T-1000

What I have found is the iron becomes a magnetic capacitor, it charges "becomes magnetic" when passing the magnet and then discharges when passing the coil, the BEMF is basicly hitting when the iron is of equal polarity of the BEMF, so pushing away and not countering the rotation, but aiding. It is quite an interesting phenomenum, and why the generating coils are between the perminent magnets, the generation comes from the stored magnetic energy in the iron, not the magnets.

As the iron is leaving a coil it is also picking up charge from the next magnet but in opposite polarity, this is the exact same polarity of the BEMF and so repels, aiding rotation in the direction required and not against. With this it is easy to see why the load reduces on the input, and the possibilities of a self runner O0

regards

Mike 8)

Quote from: Centraflow on 2014.11.23, 10:03:30
Hi T-1000

What I have found is the iron becomes a magnetic capacitor, it charges "becomes magnetic" when passing the magnet and then discharges when passing the coil, the BEMF is basicly hitting when the iron is of equal polarity of the BEMF, so pushing away and not countering the rotation, but aiding. It is quite an interesting phenomenum, and why the generating coils are between the perminent magnets, the generation comes from the stored magnetic energy in the iron, not the magnets.

As the iron is leaving a coil it is also picking up charge from the next magnet but in opposite polarity, this is the exact same polarity of the BEMF and so repels, aiding rotation in the direction required and not against. With this it is easy to see why the load reduces on the input, and the possibilities of a self runner O0

regards

Mike 8)

I haven't got the best pulley setup in the world so I haven't been paying attention to rpms. As such I haven't noted any audible difference to the motor when generating. I'll certainly be measuring that effect under load though once I work out the best coil arrangements.

Hi Jim

You posted the vid while I was typing. Yes as I have said I think the iron becomes a type of magnetic storage like a cap. I say like a cap because it charges and discharges and is by no means perminent, that is the hole trick to how it works O0

Nice vid

regards

Mike 8)

Foregot to say that the analogy of type of cap is "none polarised", as the iron changes polarity very fast from one quadrant to the next.

regards

mike 8)

Like this ;)

regards

Mike 8)

My rig of course has a set of mags where you're coils are and the coil is on the outside.

Quote from: JimBoot on 2014.11.23, 10:56:44
My rig of course has a set of mags where you're coils are and the coil is on the outside.

yes but same difference ;D

regards

Mike 8)

Quote from: Centraflow on 2014.11.23, 10:03:30
As the iron is leaving a coil it is also picking up charge from the next magnet but in opposite polarity, this is the exact same polarity of the BEMF and so repels, aiding rotation in the direction required and not against. With this it is easy to see why the load reduces on the input, and the possibilities of a self runner O0

For self runner you have to apply small resistance resistor in series from coil on incoming iron bar and short it when iron bar passes coil... This will make more magnetic force on pushing iron bar away after it passed coil than it comes to the coil. For the rest all same basic magnetic forces apply 8)

If anyone can get the attachments pulled from this link, please post them here:

http://www.overunity.com/15083/the-new-generator-no-effect-counter-b-emf-part-2-selfrunning/msg424267/#msg424267

I'm getting errors which tells me this is worth a serious look.

Quote from: Matt Watts on 2014.11.23, 12:27:09
If anyone can get the attachments pulled from this link, please post them here:

http://www.overunity.com/15083/the-new-generator-no-effect-counter-b-emf-part-2-selfrunning/msg424267/#msg424267

I'm getting errors which tells me this is worth a serious look.

I included attachments here, just that design does not care about balancing magnetic forces so there will be always resistance for turning rotor...

Quote from: T-1000 on 2014.11.23, 12:34:54
I included attachments here, just that design does not care about balancing magnetic forces so there will be always resistance for turning rotor...

Thanks T.


I slept on this concept last night and I'm convinced the iron rotor is acting like a "keeper" used with old horseshoe magnets.  With the correct dimension ratios, the magnetic current (Ed Leedskalnin's terminology) is simply toggling back-n-forth between the iron rotor and the outside stator core.  It doesn't change in intensity or do anything dynamic, it simply switches to the easiest path depending upon where the iron rotor is located at any specific moment in time.

I personally feel a design with more than four poles is going to be more effective, but four minimum should do to prove the concept.  The width of the central core and the width of the iron rotor must be of such that the switching is clean and crisp so the flux snapping through the outer stator winding in intense.  I also feel the stator windings can be designed completely different in that they can be wrapped like a toroidal transformer, though this would certainly be more difficult with a high turn count.  Seems to me they should be positioned to focus on the snapping action of the magnetic current between poles.  Imagine the outer stator as a circular ring of C-cores that are all bound together.

Having not actually built a running model of this machine, I'm clearly speculating at this point, but I'm convinced with the proper design, such a machine has merit of further investigation.

What would be very interesting is if the center core was unlocked and a torque gauge installed on it.  If we saw increased torque on this gauge when we applied electrical load to the stator windings, we would have our answer.  This would prove that we have created the condition where Lenz Law is acting between two statically mounted objects--the exact condition we are looking for.

Dear All.

Gary effect in action !!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ACykTfXspfM

Cheers Grum.

Quote from: Grumage on 2014.11.23, 18:44:30
Dear All.

Gary effect in action !!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ACykTfXspfM

Cheers Grum.

Hi Grum


Nice video as always O0

Yes it was yesterday that I found this sort of no mans land effect and also magnetic flip effect, it starts the mind racing on the possibilities of a magnetic motor, oh well it will have to be another day, I'm still trying to get this other motor put to bed, so to say, I am thinking of building from scratch so as to be able to change things quickly and easily, and so will become a big job C.C

regards

Mike 8)

Hey grum,
Nice model. I'll have to watch this one. A few times I think

Thanks  Guys.   O0

This one has been a long time coming. Verpies has been my inspiration !!

http://www.overunity.com/12736/kapanadze-cousin-dally-free-energy/msg384779/#msg384779

Cheers Grum.

Quote from: Grumage on 2014.11.23, 18:44:30
Gary effect in action !!

Yes Grum, this is very beneficial.  Good job!

It is clear to see with a little timing control and some balancers, a perpetual motion machine is well within our grasp.  I'd be willing to bet if you gave that device to a young child, tell them to come and get you when it teeder-todders by itself, he/she could do it in a matter of days.  If you wanted to ruin things though, tell them that perpetual motion is not possible and the only way you can do it is to sacrifice your life.

We walk upright, have opposable thumbs and binocular vision; any limitations we may have is in our heads.

Quote from: Grumage on 2014.11.23, 20:54:47
Thanks  Guys.   O0

This one has been a long time coming. Verpies has been my inspiration !!

http://www.overunity.com/12736/kapanadze-cousin-dally-free-energy/msg384779/#msg384779

Cheers Grum.

I see youve been TK'd  ;D

regards

Mike 8)

Quote from: Centraflow on 2014.11.24, 11:33:17
I see youve been TK'd  ;D

regards

Mike 8)

Who hasn't :)

well
out of all the "critical" fellows over there ,the Koala is in a class all his own
he actually experiments and I consider him an asset.

yes Koalas do bite sometimes... but ...? I try to find the good in everyone and I see a lot of good as well as good intentions in that man.

but I'm from NY and I have very thick skin as well as a thick skull... :o

just one mans opinion.

thx
Chet

Quote from: Chet K on 2014.11.25, 05:32:39
well
out of all the "critical" fellows over there ,the Koala is in a class all his own
he actually experiments and I consider him an asset.

yes Koalas do bite sometimes... but ...? I try to find the good in everyone and I see a lot of good as well as good intentions in that man.

but I'm from NY and I have very thick skin as well as a thick skull... :o

just one mans opinion.

thx
Chet

Point taken.

Jim
I'm not really sure what the message is myself ,and I do not want to appear condescending .
I just want things to change ...

and try to work with those who will give the effort?

as Rob has said, Time's  a wasting..

and one thing we do know is ,ultimately working together is what this will take and dealing with all the different personalities ,nationalities and backgrounds will always be a challenge.

But we are more than capable of working this out...

we shall see?

thx
Chet 

Quote from: Grumage on 2014.11.23, 18:44:30
Dear All.

Gary effect in action !!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ACykTfXspfM

Cheers Grum.

In order to understand the physics behind the Gary Effect I did some quick FEMM simulations of a bar magnet and an iron armature.  The attached pdf shows the induced poles at the ends of the armature changing polarity as the distance between the magnet and armature is changed.  If this is the Gary Effect then it is fairly obvious as to how it occurs.  If that effect is used to get OU then my guess is that it is the atomic dipoles in the ends of the armature that get flipped to change direction which supply the energy somehow.  Don't know whether this is a help or a hindrance  :-[.

Smudge

Hi Smudge,

Thanks for the simulations. When I first learned about the Wesley Gary neutral zone, I thought a horse shoe magnet is a must or at least two magnets whose unlike poles joined with a soft iron keeper on one side to form a horse_shoe like magnet and another keeper in front of the horse shoe is moved to find the neutral zone. Later I found that neutral zone comes about several ways, like shown in this 3 minute long video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WYvP7VuFmNo

There is another very short video in which a horse shoe magnet is used and the pole change is indicated by a compass:

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xw7f1f_wesley-gary-neutral-zone_tech 

In fact, it may be this setup, using a horse shoe and a moving keeper in front of it,  with which Wesley Gary may have built a generator because the mechanical input to oscillate the keeper in the neutral zone was said to be minimal in this setup. And the electric output power was taken from the coil wound onto the soft iron keeper. Variations are certainly possible.

I mention all this because if you think there is a difference between the neutral zone created in front of a horse shoe and that of the setup you simulated, then could you simulate the horse shoe setup too? If you think there is no any difference, then no need for simulating the horse shoe magnet with the keeper in front of it.

I would certainly prefer using the horse shoe magnet setup (or substituting the horse shoe with two magnets + a soft iron yoke to reduce cost) because much less stray flux is created, compared to either the setups shown in the first video above or in your simulation.

Have you checked in your simulation or can the simulation indicate any neutral position for the iron when the soft iron armature has no induced poles at it edges (at a certain distance)?

Thanks,  Gyula

Quote from: gyula on 2014.11.25, 19:24:00
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WYvP7VuFmNo

The http://youtu.be/WYvP7VuFmNo?t=1m32s is exactly what should be in your generator when the coil is shorted. So the iron bar will fly through the coil and magnet without any resistance... :)

Cheers!

Hi T-1000,

In the setup at 1:32 you refer to, the iron bar is attached to the left hand side magnet. So you mean that when there is a certain air gap between the left hand side magnet and the iron bar, then a similar neutral state is achieved between the two facing repel magnets, right?  If yes, I can agree with that, however I wonder why the coil is to be shorted? What benefit can a shorted coil give in such setup?  You meant a load which could be a short too?

Thanks,  Gyula

Correct, the iron bar has to be spaced betwen magnet and coil.
The shorted coil is due its Lenz reaction to become alternating magnet so you can find best distance from iron bar then. The open coil does not create any opposing magnetic field...

Hi T-1000,

Okay, I understand: you meant the short to find the best distance from the iron bar. This did not turn out from your previous post... and sorry that I am not a mindreader.  :D

Cheers

Quote from: gyula on 2014.11.25, 20:44:18
Okay, I understand: you meant the short to find the best distance from the iron bar. This did not turn out from your previous post... and sorry that I am not a mindreader.  :D

My understanding is that the iron bar "keeper" or magnetic shunt moves into position in such a way that it bypasses the magnet flux going through the coil from the stationary magnets which creates an EMF in the coils as they try to collapse.  This EMF then hits the electrical load and instantaneously creates a back EMF against the coils.  But where does this back EMF go?  It goes through the magnetic shunt, along with the flux from the stationary magnets.  And presto, change-o, you have eliminated Lenz Law on your generator.

If I'm mistaken in this mode of operation, please advise.

Quote from: Matt Watts on 2014.11.25, 23:56:42

My understanding is that the iron bar "keeper" or magnetic shunt moves into position in such a way that it bypasses the magnet flux going through the coil from the stationary magnets which creates an EMF in the coils as they try to collapse.  This EMF then hits the electrical load and instantaneously creates a back EMF against the coils.  But where does this back EMF go?  It goes through the magnetic shunt, along with the flux from the stationary magnets.  And presto, change-o, you have eliminated Lenz Law on your generator.

If I'm mistaken in this mode of operation, please advise.

Sooo many configs I want to try with this. Like does the neutral zone exist with non ferrous materials?

Quote from: gyula on 2014.11.25, 19:24:00
snip....

I mention all this because if you think there is a difference between the neutral zone created in front of a horse shoe and that of the setup you simulated, then could you simulate the horse shoe setup too? If you think there is no any difference, then no need for simulating the horse shoe magnet with the keeper in front of it.

I would certainly prefer using the horse shoe magnet setup (or substituting the horse shoe with two magnets + a soft iron yoke to reduce cost) because much less stray flux is created, compared to either the setups shown in the first video above or in your simulation.

Have you checked in your simulation or can the simulation indicate any neutral position for the iron when the soft iron armature has no induced poles at it edges (at a certain distance)?

Thanks,  Gyula

Hi Gyula,

The simulator I use is the free one (FEMM) and it is a 2D simulator.  IOW it actually simulates something that is infinitely long in the third dimension (into or out of the screen).  Although it is possible to create a horseshoe shape that horseshoe is infinitely thick.  It is not possible to examine something that is above or below the horseshoe, only something opposite the poles (and that something is also infinitely long on that third dimension).

It is certainly possible to adjust the spacing in my simulation to reach the point where there are no flux lines emanating from the "ends" of the ends of the soft iron, thus indicating a zero pole there, but how do you define the "end" since you will find flux lines near those ends.  In all these situations it is not possible to define a point pole, the "pole" is always spread out over a distance.  The observation of a zero pole depends very much on how it is being observed and that brings in the position and size of the other object near that pole (which could be another thin piece of iron or the pole face of another magnet).  Gary had his other object directly opposite the "end" and so deduced a zero pole there, but move that object to one side (like the shield being discussed in this forum) so that it is seeing more of the flat surface of the iron and then the zero pole condition is different.

Smudge

Dear Smudge,

Thanks for your kind answer, I disregarded a little bit the limitations of 2D simulators.

Regarding the definition of the ends: I meant as you wrote i.e. there would be no flux lines emanating from the very 'ends' of the ends of the soft iron when the soft iron is positioned exactly in the neutral line or zone.
It is okay that near the edges (i.e. moving a flux sensor probe from the very edge towards the centre of the iron lengthwise), more and more flux lines start to appear. I agree also that moving the 'object' (soft iron piece - or 'shield') towards one side, the zero pole condition changes.

Gyula

Hi Matt,

I think that the mode of operation could be very much like you have described.  However, I think we have to consider the back EMF flux as a possible Lenz-effect candidate because it comes back from the coil and should work against not only the induced flux in the soft iron but against the flux field in the air gap around the iron, the flux coming from the magnets in both cases. However, it seems (as I imagine) that the counter flux from the coil would be able to reduce the overall flux available from the magnets but this effect would influence the free passing of the soft iron through the coil only a little. This is why T-1000 mentioned above to tinker with distance between coil and soft iron (as well as with the size of the iron lengthwise I suppose).

Question is that this supposedly no Lenz (or low Lenz) setup is able to produce COP > 1 results. Only careful build and test can give a correct answer.

Gyula

Quote from: gyula on 2014.11.26, 14:05:03
Hi Matt,

I think that the mode of operation could be very much like you have described.  However, I think we have to consider the back EMF flux as a possible Lenz-effect candidate because it comes back from the coil and should work against not only the induced flux in the soft iron but against the flux field in the air gap around the iron, the flux coming from the magnets in both cases. However, it seems (as I imagine) that the counter flux from the coil would be able to reduce the overall flux available from the magnets but this effect would influence the free passing of the soft iron through the coil only a little. This is why T-1000 mentioned above to tinker with distance between coil and soft iron (as well as with the size of the iron lengthwise I suppose).

Question is that this supposedly no Lenz (or low Lenz) setup is able to produce COP > 1 results. Only careful build and test can give a correct answer.

Gyula

To use Lenz for your advantage the coil should go into kind of resonance state under load and - the iron bar should get opposite polarity from next magnet to it after covering coil core like in my drawing http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=2678.0;attach=15567 So the magnetic pole change in coil will become again same as magnetic pole in iron bar which will start pushing it away and that will create rotor motive force if the current is less in the coil when iron bar approach it than when it goes to next magnet on opposite poilarity away from coil.
Also the magnetic source are still magnets and as soon as magnetic polarity change happens you might expect different polarity reaction in coil so with careful arrangement you should get generator-motor on same coils.

The explanations might not give you full view what will happen and the best asnwer is in actual build... "The seeing is believing" - and I agree with that :)

Quote from: gyula on 2014.11.26, 14:05:03
However, I think we have to consider the back EMF flux as a possible Lenz-effect candidate because it comes back from the coil and should work against not only the induced flux in the soft iron but against the flux field in the air gap around the iron, the flux coming from the magnets in both cases.

Something else I haven't fully thought through is the direction of the back EMF.

When the magnetic shunt moves into position between the inner static poles, it magnetically connects a north with a south.  This shunt also connects the back EMF flux from the coil, pole to pole.  What I don't know and can't quite visualize at the moment is if this shunt neutralizes a north/south from the permanent magnets with a south/north from the coil, or if it adds to the flux--both north/south in the same direction through the shunt.  Being certain of these two polarities would allow us to better understand its operation and how best to physically configure it.  My hunch is the two polarities meet at the shunt reversed from each other, which would mean the overall force effect on the moving shunt is zero when the coils are loaded.  When the coils are not loaded, we should see the cogging effect as the shunts try to lock in position between the inner stator poles, since this is a shorter and probably stronger flux path then going by way of two iron bars radially and through the outer stator ring.


What I do know is if I can get my hands on some sheets of silicon steel, I have a guy here locally that can cut these laminates with his water jet cutter.  I can do the CAD work to compose a couple designs and assemble a prototype generator.  All I need is the metal and some time and we will have our answer.  I have looked at modifying existing generators and have run into several roadblocks.  At the moment it appears building a prototype from scratch should be far easier and we can implement the concepts directly as we see them.  Then we can test and optimize until we have something that fully demonstrates what this concept is capable of.

Quote from: Matt Watts on 2014.11.26, 14:36:02
What I do know is if I can get my hands on some sheets of silicon steel, I have a guy here locally that can cut these laminates with his water jet cutter.  I can do the CAD work to compose a couple designs and assemble a prototype generator.  All I need is the metal and some time and we will have our answer.  I have looked at modifying existing generators and have run into several roadblocks.  At the moment it appears building a prototype from scratch should be far easier and we can implement the concepts directly as we see them.  Then we can test and optimize until we have something that fully demonstrates what this concept is capable of.

Yes, the build from scratch is the best option for process understanding.
You can take http://alt-nrg.org/files/selfrunning_free_energy_device_muller_motor_generator_romerouk_version1_1.pdf as the base then put magnets couples instead of coils in side disk with arrangement we are talking here and put keeper iron bars on rotor. The coils cores should be in the center between two magnetic poles on opposite side disk and the rotor iron keeper bars should cover coil cores first before locking in between two magnetic poles of magnets. The rest of stuff should be easy, when you will have coils mounted, add 2 diodes in series for one current direction on the 1 wire of coil and 2 diodes in parallel to opposite current direction to shunt 2 diodes in series. Make sure the current polarity match to flow over 2 diodes in series when iron bar is approaching coil. So that is the basics :)

Off my small coil I'm now getting 140v and using a MOT primary I'm dimly lighting a 12 0.1A incandescent. No noticeable bemf not measured yet I tried to but as you will see in the vid I'm currently uploading I had some err issues

Quote from: JimBoot on 2014.11.27, 10:35:38
No noticeable bemf not measured yet

Very good.  Sounds really encouraging.


I spent at least 20 hours working from these two base CAD drawings trying to find the right combination of where to put the magnetic shunts.  The blue hatch is the region where they go.  Getting closer to finding a good combination where the coils charge and then immediately get shunted without positions where there could be a lot of cogging.  BTW, the center hole isn't for a shaft, it's just a reference for the width of the poles.  Also, my idea for the output coils is to wrap them around the outside stator, fitted into the notches between poles.

By all means if you have some ideas, print these out, doodle on them and scan them back so we can have a look.

Thanks matt,
I think this has real potential. I need a better rig though.  Need to find a local laminated steel purveyor.

Tool up boys, this thing is real

Quote from: Matt Watts on 2014.11.27, 12:31:03
Very good.  Sounds really encouraging.


I spent at least 20 hours working from these two base CAD drawings trying to find the right combination of where to put the magnetic shunts.  The blue hatch is the region where they go.  Getting closer to finding a good combination where the coils charge and then immediately get shunted without positions where there could be a lot of cogging.

If you choose rotor ant stator amount of positions to be even/even there always will be cogging. In Muller design there is even/odd configuration which allows balancing of magnets attraction to both sides and you might modify cad drawing according to this.

Cheers!

Quote from: Matt Watts on 2014.11.27, 12:31:03
Very good.  Sounds really encouraging.


I spent at least 20 hours working from these two base CAD drawings trying to find the right combination of where to put the magnetic shunts.  The blue hatch is the region where they go.  Getting closer to finding a good combination where the coils charge and then immediately get shunted without positions where there could be a lot of cogging.  BTW, the center hole isn't for a shaft, it's just a reference for the width of the poles.  Also, my idea for the output coils is to wrap them around the outside stator, fitted into the notches between poles.

By all means if you have some ideas, print these out, doodle on them and scan them back so we can have a look.

Finally...someone sees light at the end of this song and dance.  The image you have is excellent.  My advice...weld that iron to the wound stator.  That's right, do not rotate the iron, use it to make a short circuit, then induce directly into it via strong magnets in your rotor.  The rotor field can move.  This gives you a transformer, where the primary (the rotor field, and secondary, the stator field, are isolated from one another via the iron.  You can pull from the coils without back drag, up till you reach saturation of the iron.  Once the iron is saturated, it behaves as if its part of the air gap, and you have drag reintroduced.

You can test this without modifying a single motor.  Grab your Bedini wheel, and spin it past a transformer, see for yourself.  This is not the way forward gentlemen, we should be investing this time and energy in comprehending Lenz.  I am called delusional when I make such comments so......to each his own.  



Regards

Quote from: Erfinder on 2014.11.27, 13:14:53
My advice...weld that iron to the wound stator.  That's right, do not rotate the iron, use it to make a short circuit, then induce directly into it via strong magnets in your rotor.  The rotor field can move.  This gives you a transformer, where the primary (the rotor field, and secondary, the stator field, are isolated from one another via the iron.

For MEG or similar there is complete different story and the most simple way for everyone to understand is in mechanics. Also the iron bar between 2 magnetic poles becomes alternating magnet when it switches from one polarity to another and in resonance it is possible to have the coil always deflecting that iron bar before each polarity change cycle on it. The main point there is to get something in middle between coil and magnet which will be changing magnetic polarities in way where net drag (same magnetic poles deflection and different poles attraction) between any of sides (magnet or coil) from that middle keeper goes down to 0 force...

Quote from: T-1000 on 2014.11.27, 13:26:51
For MEG or similar there is complete different story and the most simple way for everyone to understand is in mechanics. Also the iron bar between 2 magnetic poles becomes alternating magnet when it switches from one polarity to another and it in resonance it is possible to have the coil always deflecting that iron bar before each polarity change cycle on it. The main point there is to get something in middle between coil and magnet which will be changing magnetic polarities in way where drag (same magnetic poles deflection and different poles attraction) between any of sides (magnet or coil) from that middle keeper goes down to 0 force...

I take it you are serious, I am too.  I am not shooting off at the mouth, or from the hip.  I am speaking from experience.  Got the rig thrown up on the table, just for old time sake, no pics, this is old school, everyone should know this.  Back in my B+denini days, I built a pulse motor using a transformer as the motor coil, back then, like many are now, I was trying to beat the shit out of Lenz. Eventually I beat the fucker, but that's not the point, you got jack if you get rid of Lenz, we all have to cross that bridge.  Fact is, you can pulse an unmodified transformer, and the rotor will run like it does when you run your rotor past a standard solenoid.  I never told Tinman, but I considered this as a cheesy, lazy mans version of his L.A.G.  You can tune the remaining coil so that you can draw from it without reflection if that's your cup o tea....was mine, but then I started thinking about the bigger picture. 

Try dusting off an old MOT and giving this a twirl.....then if you like it and I am sure you will, who wouldn't, get you a steel tube and weld it to the inside of your induction motor's stator.  Fabricate yourself a decent rotor and be Lenz free till you saturate the steel.  There are better things to do with ones time and resources in this regard, but as I stated in my last post...to each his own.


Regards

Quote from: Erfinder on 2014.11.27, 13:39:15
... get you a steel tube and weld it to the inside of your induction motor's stator.  Fabricate yourself a decent rotor and be Lenz free till you saturate the steel.

This is definitely going to get some more of my attention.    O0

Starting with this image:

Quote from: Matt Watts on 2014.11.27, 20:59:10
This is definitely going to get some more of my attention.    O0

Starting with this image:

Yup....nice one!  Before you invest in that direction....acquire the following.

1x MOT
1x rotor with magnets
1x scope
wire for making connections


Fabricate a stand for the rotor, position it over the MOT, give the rotor a spin, watch scope, drop your head in shame...because its that simple.  It's not the ideal method, this method doesn't aid one in ones comprehension of the law, you just delay your education till the iron saturates and you are forced to start looking for a solution to the problem that you didn't get to the root of the first time.  It gets your foot in the door, it does get you thinking.....it got me thinking.  All this talk about moving the iron between the magnet and coils is pure entertainment, its not necessary.  The law must be  understood, once it is, you recognize what you have done by placing the coils inside a magnetic shunt.

Only after you have played around with the rotor and MOT for a while, and are satisfied that a scaled up version in the form of a converted induction machine are the way to go, do your thing, always keep in mind, that Lenz cannot be ignored, and even here, this law will be, must be adhered to.


Regards

Quote from: Matt Watts on 2014.11.27, 20:59:10
This is definitely going to get some more of my attention.    O0

Starting with this image:

Looks good for 8/8 coils and magnets on stator. On top of that you will need 9 iron bars on rotor for balancing magnetic forces. ;)

@Erfinder
I think it would be good if you would create separate topic and put all your descriptions and drawings/scope shots there. So the things would not get mixed up in single thread...

Cheers!

Had some catastrophic collapses of my rig a few times but i can report lighting an incandescent brighter now and not seeing or hearing any extra load on the battery. I have two coils hooked up and im not measuring volts anymore just looking to see how bright i can get the bulb. I think im getting close to unity but will not get back to this now until sun night my time. Certainly very impressed with the results thus far. Still running coils perpendicular to rotor but ihave also added two steels to the stator running perpendicular that i plonk the coils on. This saw a  jump of 40% in volts.  I then get another boost when i connect the steels with a third  so they form a horseshoe  perpendicular to the the motor. I think another two or three coils and ill be ready for a self runner :)

Quote from: T-1000 on 2014.11.28, 10:47:10
@Erfinder
I think it would be good if you would create separate topic and put all your descriptions and drawings/scope shots there. So the things would not get mixed up in single thread...

Cheers!

No thanks... not interested in starting another go nowhere fast thread of my own....I have said what I wanted to say and the message was well received....

 deleeted

Quote from: Matt Watts on 2014.11.27, 20:59:10
This is definitely going to get some more of my attention.    O0

Starting with this image:

O0

I don't see a mechanism for "gain" in any of this. 

Not in BEMF elimination, and not in rotors and MOTs.

I think the word "eliminator" should be removed, it is never eliminated, but you can manipulate it with fast switching silicon iron. I have been doing tests on this for the last few days, we know it's switching capabilities due to transformers, but to stick two neo 42's same pole together with only a thin silicon iron laminate between them is quite impressive, also moving a magnet across a laminate switches on and off at the same speed you can move it, this is why Jim is finding that he generates higher voltages between the magnets and not in front of them.

regards

Mike 8)

PS. I'm not really a motor man, but this is fascinating me at the moment.

The BEMF appears from collapsing magnetic field and if you support it with opposite magnetic polarity(with regards to magnetic field increase stage) from another magnet the interesting effects can be find out in simple experiment.. :)

The coil in this case is perfect magnetic switch for switching magnetic field between increasing stage (EMF) and collapsing/reversal stage (BEMF). With proper design that can be exploited and the electricity from coil becomes as bio-product (which is what we are looking for use!) for managing the reactive magnetic field strength on both stages in our advantage when creating motive force on rotor.  O0

Quote from: T-1000 on 2014.11.28, 17:12:02
The BEMF appears from collapsing magnetic field and if you support it with opposite magnetic polarity(with regards to magnetic field increase stage) from another magnet the interesting effects can be find out in simple experiment.. :)

The coil in this case is perfect magnetic switch for switching magnetic field between increasing stage (EMF) and collapsing/reversal stage (BEMF). With proper design that can be exploited and the electricity from coil becomes as bio-product (which is what we are looking for use!) for managing the reactive magnetic field strength on both stages in our advantage when creating motive force on rotor.  O0

I'm not sure, but it sounds like you are trying to combine a magnetic field, with the BEMF of another magnetic field.

Quote from: Grumpy on 2014.11.28, 17:35:27
I'm not sure, but it sounds like you are trying to combine a magnetic field, with the BEMF of another magnetic field.

For better understanding please see "conventional coil" part in https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5osYN5f35Bc
Just on phase two instead of moving magnet away we flip magnetic poles of magnet then we make phase 1 again to match same reversed coil polarity... :)
The single difference on second phase 1 is - now we are moving iron bar away from coil while reversed magnetic flux is increasing in coil.

Cheers!

Once I see the name "Thane Hiens" the bullshit meter starts blaring.  I think he is misinterpreting Lenz's Law as well.

You get a better result by using high voltage to change the magnetic field like Wagner Martin does, and Enegia Celeste also.

Quote from: Grumpy on 2014.11.28, 19:04:53
Once I see the name "Thane Hiens" the bullshit meter starts blaring.  I think he is misinterpreting Lenz's Law as well.

You can ignore the rest from 1:55 there, all I needed is basic conventional generator coil magnetic interaction explanation and first video I remembered was this .. ;)

Yeah I mistakenly thought it was a real effect once. Then I realised it was just Lenz masking the iron core of my coils.

Quote from: Grumpy on 2014.11.28, 15:58:07
I don't see a mechanism for "gain" in any of this. 

Not in BEMF elimination, and not in rotors and MOTs.

Quote from: Centraflow on 2014.11.28, 16:19:10
I think the word "eliminator" should be removed, it is never eliminated...

... I'm not really a motor man, but this is fascinating me at the moment.

I would agree guys.  This is a learning experience for me as well.  When I opened this topic, I didn't pick the same terminology then as I would today, which is a good thing, as it shows the evolution of our understanding.

Back EMF obviously isn't being eliminated, but I would say it is being redirected.  With the proper timing and geometry, this Force can be put to use or it can be ignored, made non-applicable to the device.  So we do have an avenue for relative gain just by reducing our conventional loses.  Ultimately I see two options:

1.  Prevent the back EMF from finding its way to the rotary drive source.  Or,
2.  Direct the back EMF to the rotary drive source but in the opposite direction, so it assists the rotation.

Either choice gets us a device that generates electrical output in excess of a conventional generator.  Call it gain or simply just an improvement beyond prior art.

A concept I find useful for looking at this device is what I call a rotary transformer, where we have eliminated the typical primary winding and replaced it with a moving or in this case a rotating magnetic field.  Here we have multiple transformers butted together in a ring surrounding a central alternating magnetic field.  Instead of physical windings on the primary core, we instead use magnetic induction.  The geometry is such that the alternating field we induce into the primary core never gets reflected back in a way that imposes a force opposite to the rotation.

At least that's how I think it works.  If someone could send me a pair of those magic flux viewing glasses, I could say for sure.

Quote from: Matt Watts on 2014.11.29, 01:00:01

1.  Prevent the back EMF from finding its way to the rotary drive source.  Or,
2.  Direct the back EMF to the rotary drive source but in the opposite direction, so it assists the rotation.

Either choice gets us a device that generates electrical output in excess of a conventional generator.  Call it gain or simply just an improvement beyond prior art.

A concept I find useful for looking at this device is what I call a rotary transformer,

Indeed O0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szpJ97M58G4

Nothing using BEMF can be in excess since you put the BEMF energy into the system in the first place.  At most you get back what you put in, minus losses.

I recall Tesla patenting something like this to increase efficiency, maybe not.

The definition of BEMF is from collapsing magnetic field and in this case we replace it with increasing reversed magnetic field polarity. The induction still goes on in coils for positive and negative cycles...
When the magnets are energy source all you care about is how to make magnetic flux in coil from magnets to go increase in one polarity then reverse to opposite polarity instead of increase/decrease of its strength in single polarity only and then use it for your advantage in generating net mechanical motive force in spinning rotor due the EMF in coil always having same magnetic polarity to inducing magnets.

Yep I agree Matt. It is probablyl still there but is not affecting the rotor as it has a changing field that the rotor temporarily inherits but does not carry. It discharges it as I think carman was saying and moves on. Possibly the extra lines of field from the bemf cuts through multiplies the charge picked up by the coil as the rotor is inheriting or assuming the field it enters it is not fighting against it like a mag or a coil would do. That my observations anyway

Quote from: T-1000 on 2014.11.29, 03:48:48
The definition of BEMF is from collapsing magnetic field

I have heard reference to CEMF. Do you know what that is?
.

Quote from: Paul-R on 2014.11.29, 15:56:37
I have heard reference to CEMF. Do you know what that is?

Typically that acronym is referring to the same thing:  Counter ElectroMotive Force.

Uploading latest video now. . Getting a nice glow from incandescent no extra draw from battery on the dmm anyway. Any recommendations for a good cad app for iOS? I need to redesign as the current rotor isn't cutting it.

Quote from: JimBoot on 2014.11.30, 09:51:16
Uploading latest video now. . Getting a nice glow from incandescent no extra draw from battery on the dmm anyway. Any recommendations for a good cad app for iOS? I need to redesign as the current rotor isn't cutting it.

You have a bunch of us getting excited.  Looking forward to seeing you scale this up.

Here's a CAD package that may work for you on an iPad:
http://www.cartomapcad.com/

Thanks Matt, a long way to go yet but it's the most promising device I've worked on. My first was the orbo. Pardon my ignorance but do you measure current on ac the same way you do dc?

Btw I'd love some explanations of what I'm seeing. I don't think any one else has the coils perpendicular to their rotors. I'd like to understand the theory better there and also the magnetic coupling of the steels I'm doing. I remember researching a theory around it but I can't remember what it was. On the current gen i have 3 steels that hold the coils. When I connect two of the steels with a third I get a great boost in output. In the vid I said 10% but it is a lot more than that. When I hook up the third stationary steel though I  only get a little jump. Hopefully it will be clearer in the video

Quote from: JimBoot on 2014.11.30, 10:08:10
Pardon my ignorance but do you measure current on ac the same way you do dc?

You can if you use a scope.  I've always been leery of using a clamp meter with anything but 60 cycle AC.  And even that, if your waveform isn't pure sine, the readings are dodgy.  I rarely even use a digital meter anymore.  I use an old analog Simpson, but only to see if something is increasing or decreasing, never for a hard value.

Best practice for me is to use a very small ohm shunt.  I typically go with 0.1 ohm or smaller and use my scope.  Find a common ground point and measure both voltage from the source and voltage across the shunt.  With a dual trace scope you will get a pretty good idea what you really have moving through the wire.  Having played with the many reactive power experiments, this is the only way to go to really see the phase relationship.  If there is any sort of capacitor or inductor in the circuit, don't shortcut with meters and clamps, put it on the scope as I suggest and examine closely what you are working with.

For some things, just a plain old filament light bulb tells me what I need to know, for others, go all the way and get the the scope data.  Beyond that, there are some sharp cookies on this forum that can set you up for specialty testing.

Excellent. Thanks again Matt. I think I'll wait until I get a stable  setup before before I hook up the scope. I'd also like to go direct drive and eliminate the losses in the belt. So lots to do first.
Edit: also the output is best with the laminated steel, I've tried mumetal and ferrite. Would soft iron be any better in theory? Or is electric steel the way to go?

Quote from: JimBoot on 2014.11.30, 09:51:16
Uploading latest video now. . Getting a nice glow from incandescent no extra draw from battery on the dmm anyway. Any recommendations for a good cad app for iOS? I need to redesign as the current rotor isn't cutting it.

There are many :) For example http://www.freecadweb.org/wiki/index.php?title=Download
Tutorial: https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=FreeCAD+Tutorial

Here you go http://youtu.be/v_Kf5RsTGZ4 feedback welcome

Quote from: JimBoot on 2014.11.30, 12:14:17
Here you go http://youtu.be/v_Kf5RsTGZ4 feedback welcome

Nice Jim
Do you remember TimberJack-theguy(and my good friend) that opened the IAEC forum before i took over the job.
He is putting together a very nice setup-->check it out.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=39Un7-Gsj2c

Yeah I did see that.using VCR tape head bearings. I think my next one will be the same except have the coils perpendicular.

Quote from: JimBoot on 2014.11.30, 12:14:17
Here you go http://youtu.be/v_Kf5RsTGZ4 feedback welcome

Lol-Jim had a blow out ;D
It's always good to see smoke and exploding parts--done it many times my self.
Dont forget your safty glasses Jim O0

Quote from: JimBoot on 2014.11.30, 12:14:17
Here you go http://youtu.be/v_Kf5RsTGZ4 feedback welcome

Nice one!

The 90 degrees angle is due 2 magnets facing directly each other over rotor. You can mod another cooler and instead of having magnets on outside casing put coils there. Then see what will happen ;)

Hi all,

To speed process with CAD drawings I spend my day with doing them in FeeeCAD.
The drawing is based on my concept explained earler and someone has to do a physical assembly for verification.. :)

Please see screenshots and FreeCAD drawing attached which is calculated for 20mm diameter magnets and 20mm diameter coil cores(remove .sch in .FCSTD file extension):

Thanks mate. I'll have to learn cad now I guess :)

Quote from: T-1000 on 2014.11.30, 13:00:12
Nice one!

The 90 degrees angle is due 2 magnets facing directly each other over rotor. You can mod another cooler and instead of having magnets on outside casing put coils there. Then see what will happen ;)

I think the flux would be redirected and I would lose a significant amount of output.

Quote from: JimBoot on 2014.11.30, 23:39:20
I think the flux would be redirected and I would lose a significant amount of output.

Yep pretty much as I thought. Tried it tonight. Did a rebuild of the rotor and stator. At least now I know.

So Jim, do you think it's the cogging that is the secret here?  The strong and rapid pole flips are the source of the electrical energy you are able to extract?

For the "RamaGen",

Syairchairun used 40 poles and 162 permanent magnets, then wired all the stators in parallel.  So I'm wondering with that many poles, the cogging points would be so tight, so close together and the flipping would be extremely fast even at very low RPM.  With 40 poles, that's a flip every 9 degrees of rotation, I'm not sure you could even really feel exactly where those would be by hand.

From what I have found the cogging reduces with speed of rotation, the first movements have huge cogging effect, this leads me to the following conclusion:-

I think it is the speed of magnetisation and demagnetisation of the iron, the pickup coils need to be between the magnets, the iron picks up the magnetism then gives it up over the coil, then depleted it picks up the reverse from the coil, BEMF. The iron then passes to the next magnet and the process repeats, basically the iron acts as a magnet of very short life or one that is switched off by the BEMF as opposed to causing load on the rotor. The important main thing is the iron has to be fast switching on and off, so silicon iron as in transformers is a must.

This would lead to a setup of magnet coil next to one another, then small space to allow the BEMF to be lost, that part needs to be tested, then magnet and coil again and so on. The effect is the BEMF is thrown to waste and so no load is created on rotor, and that is the secret as I see it.

Lets face it, the BEMF is the load that stops the possibility of a loop, without it the only load is friction in turning the rotor, so why not throw it out via a metal that looses it fast to the ambient or adds to the next magnetic impulse, " that last part is a very strong possibility and so the spacing would not be needed", to be tested soon.

Regards

Mike 8)

Quote from: JimBoot on 2014.12.02, 11:26:59
Yep pretty much as I thought. Tried it tonight. Did a rebuild of the rotor and stator. At least now I know.

Syairchairun had magnet -> iron in rotor -> coil in his CAD and this arrangement does not compensate magnetic attraction between magnet and iron and the forces are fighting there against movement.
The coil also has magnetic field which obviously is changing polarity in movement so we have to overcome this block by balancing magnetic forces. This is why the coil is between 2 magnetic poles in my design...
You can try to see it with 2 magnets, iron coil's core between them and moving iron bar between coil and magnets with going over one magnet under coil then reaching second magnet for Bloch wall then moving away over second magnet. The results will talk for themselves.. :)

Sorry!

Quote from: wattsup on 2014.12.02, 19:07:51
About the BEMF, there should not be any BEMF if the coils are only being induced by the magnets, there is no pulse so there is no open condition of the coils.

We are talking about situation when coils have maximum load or are shorted in other words ;) So you have Lenz force there.
If you have it shorted in conventional generator, the coil will try to push away approaching magnet and attract when it goes away.
When you have "magnet" which is switching polarity to opposite in sync with coil polarity change to be same polarity again when it goes away, the coil always will push away it. And there iron bar can be used for solution as we can use it in same was as in solenoid transformer with separate coils on same core. Just North and South magnets instead of primary transformer coil and the core movement across like in conventional generator... The rest can be seen when experimenting :)

Cheers!

Quote from: Matt Watts on 2014.12.02, 13:12:08
So Jim, do you think it's the cogging that is the secret here?  The strong and rapid pole flips are the source of the electrical energy you are able to extract?

For the "RamaGen",

Syairchairun used 40 poles and 162 permanent magnets, then wired all the stators in parallel.  So I'm wondering with that many poles, the cogging points would be so tight, so close together and the flipping would be extremely fast even at very low RPM.  With 40 poles, that's a flip every 9 degrees of rotation, I'm not sure you could even really feel exactly where those would be by hand.

Yep the stronger the cogging the better the output. I'm tempted to do attracting poles facing but hot glue I fear will not hold the mags in place in that config. Any theory if that is worth the test? I'm only looking for more output :)

Quote from: wattsup on 2014.12.02, 19:07:51

What you see there as drag is because it is pure magnet to coil drag, where as the coil becomes energized it proportionally becomes an electro-magnet thus you have the magnet passage to electro-magnet drag which is very normal regardless if you are using a magnetic diversion method.

And to be clear, the coil becoming "energized" is the coil carrying current.  Of course that current is determined by the voltage induced into the coil (by rate-of-change of flux) and the load impedance, but see later comment.

QuoteThe only way I can think of to beat drag is to not let the coils increase in their energized state. If the coil is connected to a capacitor via a diode or a bridge rectifier, the capacitor grows in potential and proportionally so does the energized state of the coil and so does the drag.

That's not quite true.  The capacitor can grow in potential (volts) while the current is reducing.  For example normal pulse charging of a capacitor does this where initially the current is a high value but them reduces exponentially while the capacitor voltage increases exponentially.  The energized state of the coil (current) does not follow the energized state of the capacitor (volts).

What I think a lot of people miss is that the flux that is changing (and creating the coil voltage) is actually the sum of the flux from the moving magnet and the flux from the coil current, it is not just the magnet flux itself.  IOW the coil inductance comes into the equation.  So it is necessary to delve deeper into this situation to find out what actually happens when you put a capacitor across the coil.  And it is interesting to consider a capacitor without your diode.

If you have an array of magnets whizzing past the coil the induced open circuit voltage can look like a sine wave, and that can help in understanding what really goes on.  You can consider the coil circuit as a closed series LCR tank circuit with a (zero impedance) voltage generator in series with the L, and the value of that voltage is the open circuit voltage of the coil.  Note that this includes the coil inductance L which for an air coil or one where the core does not saturate is constant.  It is then easy to deduce the phase between the current and that induced voltage where it is found that under the right conditions the current can be almost 90 degrees shifted from the voltage.  That puts the "energized coil" in a different position relative to the magnets, indeed it can now not create a drag at all but actually a boost.  Unfortunately at typical rotation speeds this situation demands that (a) the coils be shunted by a low ESR capacitor and (b) the coils have impossibly low resistance.  IOW there is a practical limitation that is the reason this effect has not been discovered or utilized.  But maybe the type of motor here that has many magnets (thus creating much higher frequency) can resolve this dilemma.

Smudge

Quote from: JimBoot on 2014.12.03, 01:22:35
Yep the stronger the cogging the better the output. I'm tempted to do attracting poles facing but hot glue I fear will not hold the mags in place in that config. Any theory if that is worth the test? I'm only looking for more output :)

New rotor built , cogging is so strong now I can't turn it, doh! I have epoxied the rotor to the new axle and am waiting for it to dry. I'll spin it up with the drill tomorrow and doo some measurements. I'm thinking of putting the stator on rails and moving it into place once the rotor has momentum.

Hi everyone,

I was wondering what the Wave Form of one of these devices may look like.
So I put together a simple test device using a shaded motor coil with two N - S ceramic magnets between it and placed a thin board over it so I can manually slide different cores over it to observe the wave forms and see if there's anything unusual we can see.

I find the waveform to be different then the standard and would like the opinion of others as to why you would think this would make a difference in a generator.

I also noticed the wave form is quite different depending on how wide the core I manually move over magnets and coil.

First picture is the coil and magnet test setup and cores to be used. Second picture is with the thin board over the test setup with a core ready to be moved by hand.
The below scope shots are the results of U-core, then thin core, then wide core.

Please share your thoughts

Luc

Quote from: gotoluc on 2014.12.03, 22:36:36
So I put together a simple test device using a shaded motor coil with two N - S ceramic magnets between it and placed a thin board over it so I can manually slide different cores over it to observe the wave forms and see if there's anything unusual we can see.

The waveform is different due magnetic field discharge in middle of cycle.
Also if you move coil away and keep its core in center then move iron bar between coil and magnetic poles, this will give even better results on coil...

Thanks luc and arunas. I built another rotor and having some major issues with the cogging. Not getting anywhere near the output of my first design. The main difference is I'm  using a drive shaft so I'm not getting the benefit of the pulley magnification. Even with good Rpms though my alloy rotor does perform anywhere near that of the plastic rotor

Quote from: T-1000 on 2014.12.04, 10:28:54
The waveform is different due magnetic field discharge in middle of cycle.
Also if you move coil away and keep its core in center then move iron bar between coil and magnetic poles, this will give even better results on coil...

T,

This pendulum example you posted, do you have any idea how fundamental this is?

If someone gets this working, placing the concept into a M/G should be almost child's play.

All this design needs is some geometric tuning to find the proper magnets, dimensions and spacing; "The rest is history" as they say.

O0

The only thing I may add, is unlike a pendulum, in a M/G the iron bar will continually flip, since it does not change its direction of motion.

Quote from: Matt Watts on 2014.12.04, 19:17:27
T,

This pendulum example you posted, do you have any idea how fundamental this is?

If someone gets this working, placing the concept into a M/G should be almost child's play.

All this design needs is some geometric tuning to find the proper magnets, dimensions and spacing; "The rest is history" as they say.

O0

The only thing I may add, is unlike a pendulum, in a motor the iron bar will continually flip, since it does not change its direction of motion.

It is fundamental and this is why I repeat myself over and over again to get it communicated right :D

Also here is first scope shot of open coil from actual assembly from my CAD drawing. Shorting coil does not affect rotor at all as I predicted!
And 16 stator magnets with 9 blades on rotor still have not very balanced magnetic forces when running free but that is geometry issue to solve later on...

Quote from: T-1000 on 2014.12.04, 19:32:25
It is fundamental and this is why I repeat myself over and over again to get it communicated right :D

Maybe it's that accent of yours.  hehe   ;D

Quote from: T-1000 on 2014.12.04, 19:32:25
Also here is first scope shot of open coil from actual assembly from my CAD drawing. Shorting coil does not affect rotor at all as I predicted!

Okay, good.

Having done a lot of work with Bill Alek's Split Flux Transformer, I would expect no load and full short to behave that way.  Now what happens in the middle?  Can you find a particular resistance where the rotor speed is most effected?

Quote from: T-1000 on 2014.12.04, 19:32:25
And 16 stator magnets with 9 blades on rotor still have not very balanced magnetic forces when running free but that is geometry issue to solve later on...

Again, I figured this ratio would be better, but not optimal.  I have a hunch an arrangement using the Golden Angle (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_angle) will prove to be much smoother for rotor motion.  Unfortunately we can't take this series out to infinity, so it still won't be perfect.  We just add as many irons as will fit and then mechanically balance the assembly by weight.

Quote from: Matt Watts on 2014.12.04, 19:48:40
Now what happens in the middle?

That bump in bottom of scope shot is the middle :)
The BEMF gets support from opposite magnetic polarity and shoots back up to complete sine wave...

Looking good arunas.

Quote from: gotoluc on 2014.12.03, 22:36:36

...
I find the waveform to be different then the standard and would like the opinion of others as to why you would think this would make a difference in a generator.

I also noticed the wave form is quite different depending on how wide the core I manually move over magnets and coil.
...

Hi Luc,

Have been thinking on the induced waveforms you have shown. I assume you tried to apply the same speed for all the 3 cores by your hand, right?

When I first saw your scope shots, I recalled Naudin's test with two orientations for a coil, where he moved a magnet in front of the coil, then tangentially to the coil, see here: http://jnaudin.free.fr/images/magconfig.gif  from his site http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/mromexp.htm 
I think the right hand side setup shown in the picture gives a similarly shaped induced voltage you received, even though there are certain differences, I think the tendency is similar.
What I mean on similarity is that all 3 induced voltage waves of yours start with a small (negative) peak which suddenly goes up and peaks in one or two (positive) peaks, then suddenly goes down and change sign again and ends in a small (negative) peak. The order of the peaks (negative) and (positive) could be upside down, depending on the NS or SN placement for you parallel magnets, just like in case of Naudin if he had used a South pole up instead of the North up, his waveform would have started with a small positive polarity first as the S pole moved from left to right.

For your U core and the wide core the 'split into two peaks' of the single positive peaks comes about, I think, because these two cores are able to bridge directly the two magnets with overlaps and the flux of the perm magnets (mainly in the top part) would prefer closing via the appearing U or wide cores when they are just above the magnets symmetrically and most flux on top is "sucked" away from the coil core and goes through the moving cores. This is not so for the moving thin core that cannot form a shunting bridge fot the facing magnets.

Which waveform would make a difference in a generator, you ask. I would prefer the U shaped core but with its thickness matching the length of your magnets (now the U core thickness is less than the magnet length if I see it correctly). The U shape gives the biggest flux change out of the three I think and perhaps you wish to consider moving an U core under your magnet-coil setup too, now you show the U core moves only above the setup of course. This way the flux change could be even higher in the coil core. I mean two U cores moving alltogether as a rotor, sandwiching the stator magnets + the coil whenever they pass but then the total setup would become 'clumsy'...   :D  surely a mechanically better setup could be devised.

Gyula

Gyula

Maybe these clips show something of interest, 2nd Clip shows regular generator action load (rpm slows), neutral action with load (rpm no change), acceleration action with load, and also a more dramatic acceleration under short circuit, Waveforms show the "tune".

Fair warning the setup is loud on a (wooden frame), turn volume down to begin with.

Clip #1 shows the setup.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W2NfmyyhbZs

Clip #2 shows the entire run.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TV_dm8COKBY

Short clip of actions.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iFWin-crxQY
..

I can show a speed up under load or short circuit using almost any gen coil with a core, some inductance, some capacitance and a prime mover.
..

Theoretically cogging should be almost "net drag neutral" because the cog consists of a pull and a push of almost equal magnitude/strength.

..

Quote from: Farmhand on 2014.12.05, 13:21:08
Maybe these clips show something of interest, 2nd Clip shows regular generator action load (rpm slows), neutral action with load (rpm no change), acceleration action with load, and also a more dramatic acceleration under short circuit, Waveforms show the "tune".

Well, in these clips you got single static magnetic pole still moving across coil..
The fundamental requirement is to have magnet with flipping poles as it moves... ;)

Sorry!

Noteworthy information:

Quote from: Jose Alfonso Hernando
It is only now when I have realized the significance of my experimenting with diamagnetism and its impact on the contemporary power production and the Lenz Law. This experimenting reveals that diamagnetism is only a temporarily induced property.
Diamagnetism is caused by induction of circular (eddy) electric currents within some materials, copper being one of them. As an external magnetic field approaches copper (let copper stand in for any diamagnetic material), eddy currents induced within copper create their own magnetic field, which always opposes the polarity of the induction field. Therefore the copper is temporarily repulsed by the approaching external magnetic field, disregards its polarity. This repulsion eventually disappears as the eddy currents within cease to flow. Once the magnetic field is being withdrawn from the copper, the diamagnetism reverses and now the copper follows, or appears to be attracted by the external magnetic field. This is the underlying principle behind the Lenz Law effect in copper coil assisted standard power generation.

Ferromagnetism is again caused by induced eddy currents within the ferromagnetic material (let iron stand for all ferromagnetic materials). The differences between diamagnetism and ferromagnetism are as follows:

• Iron material structure organizes itself under the influence of an external magnetic field for the duration of that influence, as opposed to diamagnetism.
• Ferromagnetism is always attractive, as opposed to diamagnetism, which is directionally alternating.
• Iron has the capacity to grossly enhance the density of the external magnetic field, as opposed to diamagnetism, which never even matches the density of the external field. The ferromagnetic enhancement is caused by domain restructuring. While diamagnetism only induces eddies in the existing crystalline structure, ferromagnetism also changes the material structure by blocks (domains).

Ed Leedskalnin has stated "I made more electricity with steel, than I ever made with copper", because he has found out during his experimentations that induction of steel wire coil by a magnetic field always caused attractive force between the inducing field and the field of the induced coil, as opposed to a copper coil. This means that a magnetic rotor finger approaching a steel coil is attracted to that coil. As it retreats, it is again attracted to it. This comes to a wash and there is no net back torque on the rotor except for friction.

Following that, Ed Leedskalnin had built a generator with steel wire windings, or more likely rewound an existing one securing for himself his own source of free electric power. He lived happily ever after till the time when his vanity got better of him and made him to apply for a patent on his invention. Only that this is the big No-No explicitly spelled out in US Patent Office regulations. US Patent Office will not issue a patent for anything, which is claimed to provide free energy or, in their own language, a perpetual motion machine. Because Ed's was an over unity device, Ed's patent application has never made it into the US patent office records, never mind ever being granted.

And, because someone got somehow hold of Ed's patent application and found out (or knew) that the thing worked, Ed Leedskalnin had suddenly died "of cancer".

http://noticiasseleccionvaldeandemagico.blogspot.com/2014/07/leedskalnin-iron-man.html


Anyone care to take an old generator off their shelf and rewind it with steel wire?

If it works, I can't possibly think of a way to get where we want to go any more simple.

Quote from: Matt Watts on 2014.12.05, 22:53:17
Noteworthy information:

http://noticiasseleccionvaldeandemagico.blogspot.com/2014/07/leedskalnin-iron-man.html


Anyone care to take an old generator off their shelf and rewind it with steel wire?

If it works, I can't possibly think of a way to get where we want to go any more simple.

Not this black duck.

I just realised another variable from my last video generator test 8. The steels I was using were stacked. I'm not sure if that would influence the output but I thought it was worth noting as I have not been able to replicate the output from that rotor. It may just be I have not had the steels close enough to the mags in other rotors. I could get 140v on my first rotor with the little coil and only 10v - 20v on other rotors using steels oriented in the perpendicular orientation.
(//)

I haven't tested this but would the orientation of the steel layering in relation to the magnet effect cogging? See my diagram above and have a look and also my vid where I light up the bulb. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v_Kf5RsTGZ4
Between the layers there must be an airgap of some sort. Surely then individual layers would have some individual polarity? It would be trivial to test but I can't work on it anymore this evening. Could this also mean an increase in output because the coil is seeing many layers flipping rather than just a single face?

Just a thought.

I'm looking at this guy a little more closely now too. http://youtu.be/qoWMFDDL1AU

Quote from: JimBoot on 2014.12.06, 11:50:14
I'm looking at this guy a little more closely now too. http://youtu.be/qoWMFDDL1AU

Just gave him a hint in comments about losses with Eddy currents and in rotating disks there are lots of it...
Will see how it will turn out. ;)

Sorry!

Quote from: Farmhand on 2014.12.05, 13:21:08
Maybe these clips show something of interest, 2nd Clip shows regular generator action load (rpm slows), neutral action with load (rpm no change), acceleration action with load, and also a more dramatic acceleration under short circuit, Waveforms show the "tune".

Fair warning the setup is loud on a (wooden frame), turn volume down to begin with.

Clip #1 shows the setup.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W2NfmyyhbZs

Clip #2 shows the entire run.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TV_dm8COKBY

Short clip of actions.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iFWin-crxQY
..

I can show a speed up under load or short circuit using almost any gen coil with a core, some inductance, some capacitance and a prime mover.
..

Theoretically cogging should be almost "net drag neutral" because the cog consists of a pull and a push of almost equal magnitude/strength.

..

Interesting to see you Famhand doing some Thane Heins Regen-X video demos!

I'm quite sure you're getting the effect due to the long length your core legs have. This extra core length delays the coils BEMF at the correct RPM based on the quantity of magnets you rotor has.

JLN has also pointed this out (extra core length) when he was testing Thane's ReGen-X coil effects.

Finding the ideal combination, core length to coil, coil self capacitance, magnet quantity and spacing on rotor, ideal RPM are not all know. Care to make it your contribution?

Luc

What Thane Heins Regen-X was doing basically is the attempt delay of Lenz magnetic force reaction and to have it when when magnet is already under coil.
To me after all research this looks like to delay problem and good try to avoid what is happening in first place.. Still, a good possible workaround on high speed solutions where coils have very large inductances. :)

When attacking problem in its cause the high speed is not required at all and with the arrangement of Lenz force to reverse magnetic polarities 4 times instead of 2 in coil with the help of alternating magnet instead of static when passing the coil is one of real solutions to the cause...

Luc and T1000, I made several mistakes with that arrangement. The core pieces I used were too small in cross section for the strength/size of the magnets, and they got hot. The inductance was not very much and so a relatively large capacitance was required, while the long cores may have added to the effect, I don't doubt the long cores could contribute to the effect, but it's mainly the "electrical length" of the generator coils and the excitation frequency which does the effect. I can do it with any coil as long as I can get the required frequency, or I tune the generator coil to have a period of the correct length. I predict that I can do it with an Air core coil as well to a different degree.

Here is a clip of the effect using a generator coil I made from the coil of a microwave over fan motor, I wound it with thicker 0.5 mm wire (not a high impedance coil) and then simply tuned the coil with a capacitor till the period was long enough to reach the rpm required for the effect to manifest with the pulse motor.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YpKZw15A41Y

This is a restriction of current output and reduction of drag due to the load reducing the amount of energy that can be transferred to the coil by the rotor (prime mover) when the load is attached the induced impedance of the coil does allow the voltage to build in the coil.

The main drag on the setup with no load is the induced activity in the generator coils L/C, when the load is attached the activity induced in the coils is less because the voltage induced into the coils L/C is clamped by the load which significantly reduces the amount of energy that can be transferred to the coils L/C and load, thus drag is reduced and the rotor speeds up, but it does have a speed limit which I found.

It's just like releasing a sand bag from a hot air balloon. The balloon is excessively loaded so that reducing the load increases the altitude without needing to use the burner, or to achieve a faster increase in altitude. Attaching a load is like dropping some sand bags (in effect).

This is a built in excessive "no load drag" which is lessened by the load being attached so as to achieve the distracting effect of acceleration under load with a motor generator, or a reduction in input power when loaded when the equivalent effect is achieved with a transformer.

I apologize for being off topic.

..

Dear All.

I reached an impasse today, I need more materials !!

So I tuned my attention to T-1000's "proof of concept" pendulum device..... http://overunity.com/15083/the-new-generator-no-effect-counter-b-emf-part-2-selfrunning/msg426103/#msg426103

A little more work tomorrow should see some results ??

Cheers Grum.

Nice one Grum. I look forward to seeing it work. I'm in the process of another rebuild.

T,

This one is for you:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WlPx22UdnzY

In the latter portion of this video he explains the neutralization concept, apparently this can be done without altering the output power.  Because the counter magnets are placed external to the stator, the pole flipping must now be occurring in the stator core.  Which means, we can easily modify most any conventional alternator just by the proper positioning of permanent magnets.

Quote from: Matt Watts on 2014.12.08, 01:31:04
T,

This one is for you:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WlPx22UdnzY

In the latter portion of this video he explains the neutralization concept, apparently this can be done without altering the output power.  Because the counter magnets are placed external to the stator, the pole flipping must now be occurring in the stator core.  Which means, we can easily modify most any conventional alternator just by the proper positioning of permanent magnets.

I seen that earler, thanks.
The Lenz force gets another force from electromagnet there so the net resulting force = 0. This what this guy was telling when showing 3 magnets in the last part.
To get that you might use 3 phase system at least so the electromagnet can be on other side of the ring.. This concept smells like Adams motor :) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=01oXbxqNB2w http://newenergytimes.com/v2/archives/fic/N/N199612.PDF http://www.intalek.com/Index/Projects/Patents/GB2282708.pdf
Also I think I might know that guy a bit from conversations in Russian teamspeak server conferences..

Cheers!

Uploading a vid of my new rotor design. I got the idea by reversing the setup in my shaded pole motor experiments hardly any cogging which may mean hardly any output. Will finish build tomorrow and hopefully test

Here's the vid to show you what I'm up to. http://youtu.be/I6Jlwa9HobM  I've got a 100ma pulse motor that should have no probs spinning this  so hopefully low lenz.

Quote from: JimBoot on 2014.12.08, 11:09:34
Here's the vid to show you what I'm up to. http://youtu.be/I6Jlwa9HobM  I've got a 100ma pulse motor that should have no probs spinning this  so hopefully low lenz.

Dear Jim.

Your video is shown as private ATM !!    :)

You will need to alter the setting.

Cheers Grum.

Thanks grum, all fixed.

Thanks for that Matt, kind of reminds me of the setup I just built on a micro scale anyway

very frustrating rotor.
low cog = low output  :(
Tried two versions of the rotor with different stator config. results sucked.

Quote from: JimBoot on 2014.12.09, 08:13:21
very frustrating rotor.
low cog = low output  :(
Tried two versions of the rotor with different stator config. results sucked.

Hi Jim,
The magnetic coupling between coil and magnet still gas to be strong but the geometric arrangement need to be solved in way where net cogging force should result zero then you can play with it. Also coil has to be treated as alternating magnet in that arrangement...

Quote from: T-1000 on 2014.12.09, 09:08:23
Hi Jim,
The magnetic coupling between coil and magnet still gas to be strong but the geometric arrangement need to be solved in way where net cogging force should result zero then you can play with it. Also coil has to be treated as alternating magnet in that arrangement...

Actually just realised my little reference coil had a short!!  O0 ;D :D The new config does generate at much lower cogging. ATM only at around 30% of the original but I have not maximised the pu arrangement.

I think Cadman is on to something here:
http://www.energeticforum.com/268293-post142.html

It will be exciting to see if he can actually build a generator to his design.

Thanks Matt what is important there is the spaces between the poles in relation to the mags. You need those interpoles to form for extra output.

Hi,

I just made quick draft for testing magnetic flux switching in solid state version. On the core there in my CAD drawing you will need attach magnets as shown in the left then fit pulsing coil on half sine wave over the middle gap to the sides of core and align its magnetic polarity to opposite from the magnets. Also the magnetic field strength should be equal for effective shorting of magnets flux path. On the right side your pick up coil should be placed for getting resulting power.
This setup will draw power from power supply for a half of cycle and the second half of cycle is free to take back and use... ;)

P.S> Please remove .txt extension from FreeCAD drawing file after download.

Cheers!

Interesting T, may have to take a shot at something like this in the near future.

Question for you...

What was Wesley trying to say in that last post of his over at OU?   Something about all of these experiments having a central theme?  You know him pretty well, could you please elaborate on what he was attempting to say.

Thanks,

M@

Quote from: Matt Watts on 2014.12.15, 01:37:26
What was Wesley trying to say in that last post of his over at OU?   Something about all of these experiments having a central theme?  You know him pretty well, could you please elaborate on what he was attempting to say.

There is MEG in NASA based on NMR concepts I was working on with Wesley/Aidas and this device involves magnets with unstable magnetic field affected by radiation and the device is producing serious power for satellites... Possible Floyd Sweet VTA secret uncovered.

Quote from: T-1000 on 2014.12.15, 08:35:13
There is MEG in NASA based on NMR concepts I was working on with Wesley/Aidas and this device involves magnets with unstable magnetic field affected by radiation and the device is producing serious power for satellites... Possible Floyd Sweet VTA secret uncovered.

T-1000,

Can you post a link to that NASA research paper regarding the NMR/MEG?

GL.

Quote from: Groundloop on 2014.12.15, 08:42:11
T-1000,

Can you post a link to that NASA research paper regarding the NMR/MEG?

GL.

Sorry, it was classified research there and no files are available.

Mucking about with the neutral zone ak simple experiment. http://youtu.be/4OSXbG2BmUw

Some great news!

Dragon over at Energetic Forum is getting some nice results in his Syair RamaGen replication:
http://www.energeticforum.com/268465-post178.html

Quote from: dragon
The 4th build is a pincore 120/240 3kw. I didn't have any silicon handy so I made the director plates from a substandard 1008 steel sheet and electrically isolated them using HV 2mil tape. I knew they wouldn't perform as well as silicon but I figured it was good enough for a test and the assembly could be altered in the future.

The first picture shows the field of the original next to the drum assembly I made up to replace it.

Second one shows the drum installed.

Initial tests gave me around 42 volts at just under 2 amps which isn't to terrible considering the steel used. I measured the gauss being transfered into the core and it was quite low, reading around 550 gauss - not even equal to a good ceramic magnet - pretty poor. Lots of room for improvement.

Just as my 3rd build with the 6 pole the Lenz forces are completely redirected into the solid central hub and have no effect on the input so I know I'm heading in the right direction on the upgrade of this build. Calculating the rpm/Hz at the beginning it should have come in at around 1200 rpm but it actually reaches 60hz at 923 which I find a bit puzzling. Also it does output a perfect sine and should as long as the groupings are correct.

This one has 6 poles in the center with 2 rotating directors - 3 poles per sector this helps activate the field power coils which will be used elsewhere. I found you can use as many central poles as you want ( geometry allowing ) as long as they are odd groupings with the least amount being 2. So 3, 5, 7 etc. This one has a 5" hole and is about 3.25" deep so there isn't much room to pack all this stuff in.

Back to the shop to modify a drum.... fun stuff !!!

This one looks to be the ticket gentlemen.  If you can, probably wise to get to the bench and get serious.

Quote from: Matt Watts on 2014.12.16, 20:33:37
Some great news!

Dragon over at Energetic Forum is getting some nice results in his Syair RamaGen replication:
http://www.energeticforum.com/268465-post178.html


This one looks to be the ticket gentlemen.  If you can, probably wise to get to the bench and get serious.

Totally agree Matt.
It's ticking all the boxes for me atm.

And another interesting variation:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y8DzUqDisi0

Nice find Matt, I really like that one. That's exactly where I think I should have the coils

I've been thinking of this effect for a while and what keeps coming back to me is, it seems to be quite the same effect as JLN has noticed when testing Thane Heins ReGen-X coils and found he could produce the same effect just by having more core material between the coil and magnet (as picture)

Could this not be the same effect?... since syairchairun design does adds more distance and core material between coil and magnet?

Just thinking here


JLN video demo of the effect: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YUoyuiQTrRA

Luc

Quote from: gotoluc on 2014.12.18, 22:36:57
I've been thinking of this effect for a while and what keeps coming back to me is, it seems to be quite the same effect as JLN has noticed when testing Thane Heins ReGen-X coils and found he could produce the same effect just by having more core material between the coil and magnet (as picture)

Could this not be the same effect?... since syairchairun design does adds more distance and core material between coil and magnet?

Just thinking here

I do not "know" the answer, but I suspect this effect is harnessing something at the atomic level.  Iron atoms trying to re-adjust themselves from exposure to a magnetic field takes time, regardless of what MH states.  He is not a material scientist and not qualified to answer these types of questions with any authority.  So yes, observing nature and thinking about it is exactly what is needed at this point, but before we give ourselves brain cramps, it will be really useful to have some working prototypes to explore this effect in more detail.  Do that, then we can try slight alterations to the geometry, different materials and such.  At some point it will become clear how this effect really operates and what variables are important to fully exploit it.

What I find most relevant to this particular device is a quote from Nikola Tesla which I don't have handy, but the essence of it was his discovery of rotational magnetic fields and how important that concept is.  Many people instantly think of a motor or generator.  I feel Tesla may have had more in mind than that.  I think he was talking about rotating magnet fields within a material, be it air, copper, iron or whatever.  Something very interesting happens that he recognized.  What I see is this happening within the moving iron bars in the RamaGen device.  The geometry of these "directors" as dragon calls them, creates very interesting exchanges, rotation and flipping of magnetic forces as they circulate around the static core.  It is not as simple as applying Faraday or Lenz Law or calculating Lorentz Force.  There is a lot more going on here.  And like I said, I think it is manifesting at the atomic level.  Nature has found a way to balance/equalize all the fields and forces in a manner much different than she does with a typical generator.  She has to, that's what she does.  And in doing so, we have an opportunity here to not only have a superior electrical generating device than we've ever had before, but really learn how nature works.

Hi,

Regardless what theory people like MH are after when it comes to physical test it makes much more clear answer.
When there is stationary coil and magnet and moving iron core between we still get induction due changing magnetic field in coil and the iron core becomes regulating valve for that magnetic field strength on coil... If you play around with magnets extensively you might notice the non linear relationship between distance and magnetic field strength. The iron also amplifies magnetic field depending on how much of it is on the way and there is also property allowing to invert magnetic polarity or get neutral between two magnets. That all is ongoing when the iron core is moving between magnet and coil and the coil becomes alternating electromagnet which makes same conditions as in W. Gary magnetic effect but due the fact its magnetic field is induced by the magnet it is temporary only there.

In the end of the day the induced magnetic field of the coil does not oppose the external force which is making change of magnetic field and this is what everyone need to make OU condition even on slowest speed...

P.S> Not sure if anyone is aware but Faraday disk generator also has same merit. The mechanical resistance there does not change with electrical load and with appropriate speed the generated energy gets greater than energy needed to rotate it. Bruce Depalma did that in 1970's - http://brucedepalma.com/n-machine

Cheers!

Thanks for your great reply Matt!

It looks like there is lots to learn on this one :P

Thanks again for sharing your thoughts and views

Luc

Hey Luc,
I know that if I load more core material behind my coils I get better output but in front it reduces the output.

Thanks for sharing that Jim

I stumbled upon this video and was wondering if this would qualify as a Lenz work around design?... maybe T-1000 would be interested in such a design?

I chopped the original video to get to the final design.

http://www.tubechop.com/watch/4385356

Please let me know what you all think

Luc

In that design video I noticed coils on same stator where magnets are and the rotor further away than shortest magnetic flux path between magnets and coils. You might try to play around just most likely it won't be best magnetic flux switching case...

Quote from: gotoluc on 2014.12.19, 04:42:30
http://www.tubechop.com/watch/4385356

Please let me know what you all think

Looks very much like Jim Murray's DynaFlux Alternator.  He publicly stated this was an OverUnity device, but very difficult to manufacture.  What Jim found most useful from this device was its ability to confirm to him that it is possible to build a generator that only functions as generator, unlike typical generators that have aspects of both a motor and a generator, each working against themselves.

A 3d printer for the mold and some steel shot and resin I reckon we could do it pretty quickly

This was just posted at hyiq.org http://overunity.com/15083/the-new-generator-no-effect-counter-b-emf-part-2-selfrunning/dlattach/attach/145333/ bucking coils and lenz law free power extraction. I have not read it yet but I do enjoy his work.

Hi everyone,

I know you're all at the edge of your seats waiting for someone to build a test device and post the results, so today I made an effort to get mine done and as I'm writing this a video demo with basic test results is being uploaded.

I must say even though the video has some interesting results I will ask those who have hope this device is the real thing to please stay calm and not jump to the conclusion this is a free energy device until we have done many more tests and I'm ready to make that claim.

I'll explain a little why I ask this.
When I first tested the device I used the drill press (prime mover) at the slowest speed and when I connected the load it consumed the exact power from the prime mover that the load delivered. So I thought this device isn't working and was going to post the video that way.

However, just before uploading the video I had the idea to try a higher RPM just to see what would happen.  So I went up two speeds and to my surprise it now was delivering power to the load without affecting the prime mover. So then I went up another speed and now it actually uses less power when under load.
So I shot the video of that and at the end of the video I said I would try a higher load resistor to see what happens and used a 12.5 Ohm load instead of the 1 Ohm load and it delivered 30 watts to it but also used 30 watts from the prime mover.

So there's something interesting going on but we need to take our time to better understand it.

Also, some weeks back I posted that I had the feeling this was similar to the ReGen-X effect and after seeing today's results I'm still thinking the very same way. So lets work together in a caring way so we can improve this effect as a group effort.

Link to video demo: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QZXFns8PZ38 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QZXFns8PZ38)

Help ever hurt never

Luc

Hi Luc

I would say that the difference of loaded and unloaded is Lenz. When unloaded there is no Lenz at all and so the power draw is the true draw with the "magnetic drag" as the rotor passes over the stator.

This drag goes away with a load, why? well the lenz return to the rotor has been switched from being against to being in favour, this has happened in the dead area "rotor not over the stator", in this area the flux direction has changed.

I also think that frequency "rpm" has a lot to do with it as well, maybe the faster it is the greater the benefit, or as has been stated else where, there is a frequency relation to the length of rotor and stator, the stator being a full wave length and the rotor 1/2 wave length, or maybe any tuned ratio between them so not causing standing waves.

It's literally all in the tuning

regards

Mike 8)

Luc,

read this, all of it, half way down is the important part O0

http://u2.lege.net/newebmasters.com__freeenergy/external_links_from_theverylastpageoftheinternet.com/ElectromagneticDev/olafberens/olaf.htm

regards

Mike 8)

Thanks Mike, I'll look into it

Luc

Hi everyone,

as some of us have been suspecting the higher RPM seems to be storing magnetic flux in the core and possibly if it has no where to go when coil is not under load it discharges or causes a braking effect when the C core changes phase which may be the slaps sound we hear. When the coil is on load the stored flux gets out so the C core makes it through to the next phase with ease.

Here is a test example of the prime mover input power when the drill press is at medium RPM range.

120w just turning the C core with I core away
140W with I cores in position and coil not on load
135W with coil on 1 Ohm load and delivering 5W to load.

So there's 10W which is not accounted for and it's hard for me to believe that so much power is being wasted in such small cores as Eddy currents and heat losses. At lower RPM there is less losses but also less output. It all seems to be linear and under unity.
If we could come close to a break even point I would say we are on the right track but it's not looking that good at the moment.
I have tried different load values, RPM's and so on but there is always losses.
I will still try different combinations and give an update if I find something better.

Please keep in mind what I'm testing is a variation of the original idea shared in this topic.

Luc

I was hoping this would not be the case, but it appears the cogging is unbalanced, with the attraction pushing the prime mover being considerably smaller than the pulling by the prime mover to overcome it.

It's a problem of geometry I think.  Seems like I saw this before with the JB stuff and their change from attraction mode to repulsion mode.  The idea being it is easier to balance the cogging when the prime mover has to overcome the resistance on entry and gets a push on exit.

The other method is to have enough poles where for any resistance you encounter on a particular pole, there is some other pole that is giving you an equal assistance.  This is the idea T-1000 mentioned from the RomeroUK device.

Quote from: Matt Watts on 2014.12.28, 10:37:03
I was hoping this would not be the case, but it appears the cogging is unbalanced, with the attraction pushing the prime mover being considerably smaller than the pulling by the prime mover to overcome it.

It's a problem of geometry I think.  Seems like I saw this before with the JB stuff and their change from attraction mode to repulsion mode.  The idea being it is easier to balance the cogging when the prime mover has to overcome the resistance on entry and gets a push on exit.

The other method is to have enough poles where for any resistance you encounter on a particular pole, there is some other pole that is giving you an equal assistance.  This is the idea T-1000 mentioned from the RomeroUK device.

Matt did you see what I asked MH on OU.com. It was loaded by me, his answer!!!! well take it as you will, I'm not going to start anything there ;D never seen such a load of waffle, he got a bit out of his depth I think >:-)

regards

Mike 8)

Quote from: Centraflow on 2014.12.27, 10:17:53
Luc,

read this, all of it, half way down is the important part O0

http://u2.lege.net/newebmasters.com__freeenergy/external_links_from_theverylastpageoftheinternet.com/ElectromagneticDev/olafberens/olaf.htm

regards

Mike 8)

Download and archive......this ones a keeper!

Quote from: Erfinder on 2014.12.29, 07:47:44
Download and archive......this ones a keeper!

Yes it sure is.

It is all explained and tested O0

Being a radio Ham I understand this explination totally and is very important to build to the right sizes

Regards

Mike 8)

Thanks for that German post. Good read. I need help with some coil design. T said to go with max surface area i.e. pancake but with my geometry that is a tad difficult. Attached is a pic of my current setup. I can get the motor running at 4300rpm on 500ma 12vdc, which is giving me 2v ac. I'm using a lamp to give me an indication of current atm as I'm tearing down a lot and rebuilding. I've rebuilt the setup 3 times today LOL. Anyway here's what I'm observing and I'm confused. If I place the steel in the pic on top of the mag it creates heavy cogging. That bit I get. I just gave the mag greater mass and enlarged or strengthened the field. That bit I get. EVen if I place steels on 3 or six of the mags the cogging and current draw is ridiculous. Not to mention the stresses it puts on the rig. However if I put the steels BETWEEN the mags as shown in the pic I get the same amount of volts and the lamp LOOKS about the same . I can run it at six watts with the steels in place. What I'm teaching myself is coil winding and design. I've learned a lot. But I was just looking at the coils in an old McCulloch gen being discussed over at energetic and it has me a little perplexed. Initially I was looking at wind turbines coil design but I'm now wondering if there is a better way. On each of those steels a 20awg coil will give me 2v on the front. I was thinking of loading the whole steel with 3 coils or one big one. If I did 3 coils I could get maybe 4.5 - 5v on the front and about 2v on the rear. So say 5-6v per steel x 6 gives me say 35v at maybe 20ma or 7watts. Anyway that is the goal. I realise more coils gives me more flexibility in maximising amps over volts etc with different bridge configs as well.  Is there any advantage though to wind maybe only a couple of big arse coils that cover all the steels?

Small update

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A5TkAq9DJPY

Quote from: gotoluc on 2014.12.30, 04:31:47
Small update

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A5TkAq9DJPY

Looks good Luc.  Waveform much more conventional.  Glad you are still working this experiment.

I am a little nervous about the green liquid in the coffee cup this close to New Years.    :P
Is that the secret in Canada?  Anti-freeze?    ;D

Thanks Matt,

yes, anti-freeze is the best!... for cooling a resistor ;)

Luc

Quote from: gotoluc on 2014.12.30, 05:56:24
Thanks Matt,

yes, anti-freeze is the best!... for cooling a resistor ;)

Luc

Hi luc, great work. I need to learn to weld :) hot glue isn't cutting it. :)  something I observed today you may find helpful. When the poles of the rotor are magnetically connected they don't cog that much, however in my experiments the take twice as much power to run. Mass will also play a part but I can get just as much power gen for half the power cost by using a rotor that has magnetically insulated poles. Looks like absinthe to me.

Quote from: gotoluc on 2014.12.30, 04:31:47
Small update

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A5TkAq9DJPY

Hi Luc,

I wonder - is it magnetic attraction causing initial 83 watts to be used in your setup?
If the drill motor is causing that I bet it is best time to exchange it to smaller pulse motor which will consume less than 10 watts if magnetic attraction is not so big..

Also I have suspicion about geometry there - if the C core is passing magnet by approaching and leaving it directly on N/S poles vectors the magnetic force is largest.
To see what I am about get two very strong magnets, snap them together and try to separate them apart. You will see how much force is required just to do that. And if you start sliding them on the side the force required to separate them is much smaller.

Cheers!

Quote from: T-1000 on 2014.12.30, 14:20:03
To see what I am about get two very strong magnets, snap them together and try to separate them apart. You will see how much force is required just to do that. And if you start sliding them on the side the force required to separate them is much smaller.

There's a geometry challenge for you.  Build a magnetic motor that takes advantage of this.

Two magnets on connecting rods approach each other providing the motive force of the motor,  At full extension of the rods (minimal clearance between the two magnets) a cam is activated on each magnet to slide them apart as a shearing force (motor loss), then the connecting rods are withdrawn.  At full retraction of the connecting rods, the cycle is repeated.

Power consumed = shearing force plus retraction force
Power created = attraction force

If the later is greater than the former, you should have a self-runner.

I'd bet Grum (OUR resident engine man) sees how this could work.   ;)

Quote from: JimBoot on 2014.12.30, 10:04:30
Hi luc, great work. I need to learn to weld :) hot glue isn't cutting it. :) 

Thanks JimBoot. 5 minute 2 part epoxy will work much better than hot glue. But the nice thing about hot glue is the ability to take things apart and reuse them.

Luc

Quote from: Matt Watts on 2014.12.30, 17:49:56
There's a geometry challenge for you.  Build a magnetic motor that takes advantage of this.

Two magnets on connecting rods approach each other providing the motive force of the motor,  At full extension of the rods (minimal clearance between the two magnets) a cam is activated on each magnet to slide them apart as a shearing force (motor loss), then the connecting rods are withdrawn.  At full retraction of the connecting rods, the cycle is repeated.

Power consumed = shearing force plus retraction force
Power created = attraction force

If the later is greater than the former, you should have a self-runner.

I'd bet Grum (OUR resident engine man) sees how this could work.   ;)

Funny you have said this ;D I have had an idea for quite some time about using two rotors in the same plane :D

Basicly it is an ordinary generator but a second rotor of iron, free running between the normal rotor and stator.

What I would hope would happen is any counter magnetic force produced would be absorbed by that free running iron rotor, it would be a counter magnetic force sink (drain).

I know this is not going to add but just remove the lenz reaction from being transmitted to the prime mover, but it could just be enough to get us over the hill, so to say >:-)

regards

Mike 8)

Quote from: T-1000 on 2014.12.30, 14:20:03
Hi Luc,

I wonder - is it magnetic attraction causing initial 83 watts to be used in your setup?
If the drill motor is causing that I bet it is best time to exchange it to smaller pulse motor which will consume less than 10 watts if magnetic attraction is not so big..

Also I have suspicion about geometry there - if the C core is passing magnet by approaching and leaving it directly on N/S poles vectors the magnetic force is largest.
To see what I am about get two very strong magnets, snap them together and try to separate them apart. You will see how much force is required just to do that. And if you start sliding them on the side the force required to separate them is much smaller.

Cheers!

Hi T-1000,

I made 3 videos to demonstrate and answer your questions.

First video is to explore magnetic cogging on the cores. As far as I'm concerned, the pull and push forces are equal so we should be breaking even when rotating the C core over the I cores less Eddy current losses in the cores.
Video demo: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lDR0lfv4BgU

Now lets explore the power needed just to turn the drill press and C core rotor.
Video Demo: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tXkNJZ9K_Ks

So with no I cores present we need       54 Watts
and with I cores present we needs         87 Watts

So we have 33 Watts needed to turn the C cores over the I cores.
Here is a video demo where I load the coil
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-LiYwiDrbMM

So we can get 5.3 Watts out of the coil plus we need to consider the coils DC Resistance of 1.3 Ohms which may represent another 4 Watts. So we can get 9.3 watts out plus the coil under load assists the rotor and drops the prime mover power by 4 Watts.

So we can account for 13.3 Watts! ... so where is the rest of the power going?  
There are other losses involve which we need to consider when using Iron or soft steel laminations. I think we may need to consider Iron Powder Cores! (keep in mind this is not hard like ferrite cores)
TinMan has made a great video to demonstrate steel lamination losses
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uAXtB_7RkEg

Share your thoughts.

Luc

Luc,

As I replied on overunity forum - Thanks for videos, seems your drill motor really need replacement to more economic one and the cores have eddy currents in losses as well. Also to smooth out movement you will need flywheel for kinetic capacitor role there as well.

Cheers!

Luc,

I hope this message finds you in good spirits and health.  I hope this message finds you prepared to move into the new year with no regrets regarding things experience or not in 2014.  

Your latest experiment is well constructed as usual, the results however are conventional, I am sure you are aware of this.  Your wave forms indicate (to me) that your point of maximum induced potential is between the points of greatest flux density, you are well aware of this I'm sure, and you know that this is the exact same condition we find in just about every motor or generator on the planet.  I am going to suggest something which is both unorthodox and possibly difficult to wrap ones head around.  Please do not blow this off, please consider it as I have considered many of your suggestions over the years.

• Establish the conditions where by the point of maximum induced potential manifests at the point of maximum flux density.
  
  

This places your induced flux in phase with the inducing flux.  Understand that the terms "in phase" is loosely used, its clear that the induced and inducing will still be in opposition under the new set of circumstances, bucking.  The point to be recognized as important here is that the bucking is taking place at the point of maximum flux density, the so called zero crossing.  In the scenario I suggest we have the induced potential coincident with the inducing flux, or better stated, we have voltage induced at the zero crossing.  

I hope the message is received and you consider the suggestion.  Once you understand what my suggestion implies, and have established those conditions in your setup to where you experience maximum induced potential at the zero crossing, then we can discuss the next steps.  Please do not make the assumption that the suggested is off topic.  The topic for whatever reason includes the words (BEMF Redirector).  Not really sure if the individual who started this thread really knows exactly how far that concept can be taken.  Owing to your history, I hope you see the value in what I have suggested, and where it leads when applied.


Regards

Thanks Erfinder for posting your suggestion as to where to go from here.

I can't say I understand the concept on my first read or maybe I'm not ready? but I'll go through it a few times and see if I get it.

Luc

Sorry!

Hi everyone,

Happy New Year!

Here is a video update of what I've been working on for the past 2 days

Link to video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jnTImIQlAms

Stay tuned for the test results

Luc

Quote from: Erfinder on 2014.12.31, 08:29:39
The topic for whatever reason includes the words (BEMF Redirector).  Not really sure if the individual who started this thread really knows exactly how far that concept can be taken.

I think I chose the topic as more of an advertisement to get people curious enough to take a look.  What is really happening in the device referenced in the first post, remains to be deciphered.

And where this could lead...  I have a hint based on the Skype call we had, where you showed me some interesting phenomena.  Quite frankly, you are as qualified as anyone to take us to the next level in this discovery.

Quote from: gotoluc on 2015.01.02, 00:04:31
Here is a video update of what I've been working on for the past 2 days

Link to video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jnTImIQlAms

Geez Luc, you don't mess around.  Have you gotten any sleep in the last two days?


Just a couple of checks and comments:

Stator wires:  Have you checked continuity to make sure there are no shorts or weird ohm readings?

Original rotor winding:  If it where me, I really think I'd take them completely out.  There is no telling what the ground copper may do to alter this generator's performance.  You have copper shorted everywhere, so that could cause some strange behavior.

Other than that, yes, I'm ready to see what this does when spun up.  So are you going to energize one set of coils and read the output off the other set?

Quote from: Matt Watts on 2015.01.02, 00:20:07
Stator wires:  Have you checked continuity to make sure there are no shorts or weird ohm readings?

Original rotor winding:  If it where me, I really think I'd take them completely out. 

So are you going to energize one set of coils and read the output off the other set?

Good point Matt!  I'll take out the old stator windings

All the new windings are fine (no shorts)

There are many combinations that can be done with the 4 coils. I think I'm going to start with PM on the outside armature to see what happens when the coils are loaded. Then I'll start energizing a set of coils and load the other.

Luc

Quote from: wattsup on 2014.12.31, 19:12:27
@Erfinder

I think you will need to draw something out or maybe give a simpler or more precise explanation.

@gotoluc

Try adding four magnets that cover the ends of both core levels. Seems to me since the C cores are only passing on the top of the coil cores, the center magnets you have are not being solicited that much and you are probably creating alot of cancellation inside the coil, since the coil is wound over the four bars and the center magnets, everything originates from inside the coil winding so polarity change for the coil is not that apparent. How the polarities work in your set-up would be very difficult to figure out but I can see that the center magnets inside the targeted coil will tend to permeate the coil is a very fixed impress that will not change as much as you would hope with the spinning C cores..

I would add magnets and play with the polarities, all north out, all south out, souths on one end norths on the other end, or n-s-n-s and see if this will create more output on your coil. The yellow is to show one magnet covering two levels so you need four magnets. You could even try the magnet from left to right on the top (orange) and on the bottom core at each end. There are still many ways to play this with this very fine toy. Mattel would be proud.

wattsup

Thanks for your post and suggestions wattsup. I'll give it some tries and see.

Luc

Quote from: gotoluc on 2015.01.02, 00:04:31
Hi everyone,

Happy New Year!

Here is a video update of what I've been working on for the past 2 days

Link to video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jnTImIQlAms

Stay tuned for the test results

Luc

Awesome  machine, excellent attention to detail, excellent craftsmanship.  

The machine reminds me of the L.A.G that Tinman built, a machine that I replicated.  There are some minor differences between the machine you demonstrate and the L.A.G, however these are so small that one could actually consider your new machine as a replication of the L.A.G....What I am getting at here is we are in familiar territory.  One key advance was demonstrated by Tinman, embodied in (and this is the funny part) an unmodified universal motor.  Where a diode is added to the field coil in the proper direction, led to acceleration of the device when the winding was shorted.  It was also shown that in this condition small amounts of power could be extracted.  In reading the thread, thngr also makes that same exact claim with relation to adding the diode.  The unmodified universal motor didn't have the same performance characteristics as the original L.A.G, but it did demonstrate that the effects could be produced with unmodified machine.

Another researcher who goes by the name Mbrown on the energetic forum discusses a concept which is directly related to this design topology he is researching the lockridge device.

What I feel I can say is this, there is no need for complex geometries.  Most if not all possible configurations were tested, and the best perfected to an extremely high degree back in the Victorian era.  My findings lead me to believe that at some time in the past it was found that the ideal topology was and has remained, the salient pole configuration.  The relation between induced and inducing is such that the all too familiar bucking and back drag, the so-called Lenz associated phenomena that we find in present day design typologies are reduced to such a degree as to be considered as non existent.  I've found it practical to build air-core based systems, iron is introduced externally to the circuit, via suitable choking coils.  I find that if the device isn't designed specifically to function as a motor, the iron which is primarily there to concentrate the flux for motor action isn't needed, and serves only as a dissipation, and idea which is shared by James W. German.  Iron is a double duty material in machines we contemplate, design and build.  It serves to focus the flux, but at the same time it is a conductive material.  This latter attribute we understand, but haven't tamed.  James W. German gives us some very useful advice in this regard.  

It seems everything we call the enemy is only the enemy because we don't understand how to put them to use.  The list is long but the two phenomena at the top of the list are CEMF and Eddy currents.  Both of which we can't seem to get out of our systems, in time I hope that we finally realize why we can't and how all hope vanishes when they are removed from the equation.

What is the goal?  What are we trying to accomplish fundamentally?  We all have been at this for years now....do we have any idea of where the overunity is seated?  We should be able to look at the system and identify where the surplus will be coming from.  We all have identified this however, owing to our collective inability to convert it, we don't feel justified in calling it the source of the surplus (this and the folks who know better, constantly remind us of how stupid we are for going against the well established....I stopped listening to them......not because they are wrong, they aren't, they are limited by the established).  None of this matters however, at least not  until the proper geometry is found which allows us to generate without reflection.  When we all have a topology that we can agree on, more progress will be made in a day than has been made in the last 20 years of research from new and old researchers alike.  The topology we seek was given to us.  We refuse to acknowledge it, refuse to understand it for what it is. We want to improve a system that isn't broken.  

Will this be the year when we all self oscillate as individuals, and resonate as a community?

Happy New Year!


To each his own.  Regards

@ Erfinder

I like your post  O0

What I think and also Mr. German, is that we have to take, or look at , power generation like frequency transmission, that is to say standing waves are in both, and it is those standing waves that cause the inefficiency be it  reflective RF power or magnetic power. Both these are waves and are linked permanently to one another "electro magnetic waves", and if either is not tuned correctly there are counter losses, BEMF, CEMF or SWR (standing wave ratio).

In radio transmission we transmit electro magnetic waves at frequencies we want to use. In generators we design the generator for a frequency output of 50-60Hz, but do we look at the SWR of that output in relation to the input? no not really, not in a way of standing waves such as in a transmission line.

Mr. German saw the importance and made a table top model which proved the theory, and not only that, it was replicated by an independant who the first time around did not get the results because he did not build it as Mr. German specified. On building to the specifications, which were for following wave lengths, the results were positive the second time around.

I have linked to all this in previous posts, please please read it all very carefully, it is all there and proven. The replicator made a statement to cover his back I think, Quote:- I am not saying this is over unity. Now why would he say that if it was not to cover his back??? The replicator was going to build a bigger and more powerful model, what happened to that I wonder!!

happy new year to all

regards

Mike 8)

Every electrical effect in nature is electro-magnetic wave. Purposedly we have ony those tools and parts which is needed to create inefficient devices. For example the permanent magnets comes in various shapes but all of them are standarized. Obviously you cannot find OU in standard parts or at least not too much (you can always use some capacitors ;-) - they couldn't find the reason to limit our usage on them)

I find this video very instructive

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6kPOw0d0j4E#t=255

Thanks for making this and the others O0

regards

Mike 8)

Excellent post Erfinder!

I sure hope this is the year we can all collaborate together on this one project O0

Luc

Quote from: Centraflow on 2015.01.02, 15:34:50
@ Erfinder

I like your post  O0

What I think and also Mr. German, is that we have to take, or look at , power generation like frequency transmission, that is to say standing waves are in both, and it is those standing waves that cause the inefficiency be it  reflective RF power or magnetic power. Both these are waves and are linked permanently to one another "electro magnetic waves", and if either is not tuned correctly there are counter losses, BEMF, CEMF or SWR (standing wave ratio).

I am glad something I said meets with your approval.  Unlike yourself, I am not versed in the subject matter,  I am a novice.  I only see what I am in the position to observe from my present position, and only from my bench.  I am glad that there are a few like yourself who know the system and can see and point the way for individuals like myself.  I find it incredible that we find concepts for neutralizing system antagonisms being practiced in multiple unrelated branches of science.  Specifically there seems to be a disconnect between RF power engineering practices and low power low frequency engineering practices.  The exact same kinds of disturbances in the medium are being generated, its strange that we observe that the designers of the low frequency low energy systems are oblivious to the measures taken by the prior to rid their systems of inherent limitations?   If this weren't enough, we know from other branches of science dealing with wave phenomena, that there are measures taken to remove antagonism, the ball is in our court, the behavior of many researchers in this and other communities, indicates to me that these aren't topics of interest.  

Quote from: Centraflow on 2015.01.02, 15:34:50
In radio transmission we transmit electro magnetic waves at frequencies we want to use. In generators we design the generator for a frequency output of 50-60Hz, but do we look at the SWR of that output in relation to the input? no not really, not in a way of standing waves such as in a transmission line.

agreed

Quote from: Centraflow on 2015.01.02, 15:34:50
Mr. German saw the importance and made a table top model which proved the theory, and not only that, it was replicated by an independant who the first time around did not get the results because he did not build it as Mr. German specified. On building to the specifications, which were for following wave lengths, the results were positive the second time around.

I agree with this, however, from my layman perspective, I am of the opinion that even the ideas, and tested concepts passed on to us by Mr German are limited to the SWR or whatever be the resonant condition.  This is in my opinion where the statement of this is not OU is leading.  I say that because this the conclusion I have come to.  I think OU will manifest via resonance, however, not through the present day accepted method of achieving the series resonant condition.    I feel the concept of resonance as we understand it is severely limited, we observe the condition as it manifests at a single frequency.  Ideally, wouldn't we want the series resonant condition to take place on every frequency?  Doesn't it make sense to capitalize on resonance in the following manner:  series resonance moves us from frequency to frequency, while parallel resonance keeps us moving forward by isolating us from a frequency already experienced?  I raise this question because a situation like this would facilitate the use of familiar typologies, and would not impose limitations in specifics relating to geometry like those suggested and or implied by learned men like Mr. German.

Quote from: Centraflow on 2015.01.02, 15:34:50
I have linked to all this in previous posts, please please read it all very carefully, it is all there and proven. The replicator made a statement to cover his back I think, Quote:- I am not saying this is over unity. Now why would he say that if it was not to cover his back??? The replicator was going to build a bigger and more powerful model, what happened to that I wonder!!

happy new year to all

regards

Mike 8)

I have had the information for some time now, and see the significance of the design and really appreciate the efforts of the replicator.  My problem is simple, the device was designed to protect someones interests.  Their interests were protected in the disclosure.  Its clear from the documents that we are limited to specific geometric relations.  The concept is novel, however, when its understood that we are trading one limitation for another....its time to reevaluate and return to our expressed goal.....mine being the ability to generate electrical energy without opposition nor geometric limitations.  I have found only one standardized topology that facilitates this.


Regards


Edit.....I apologize for my interruptions to the flow of the thread.

Hi everyone,

a quick test of the thngr's simple build of Ramadan Device

Link to video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0wP1GSLa_AY

Next I'm working on using the motors bushes and commutator to power the electromagnet coils.

@ Centraflow and Erfinder, looks like you're right about the RF and looking into Resonance would be one of the next steps. Hopefully in time I'll catch up ;)

Luc

Quote from: gotoluc on 2015.01.03, 21:50:51
Hi everyone,

a quick test of the thngr's simple build of Ramadan Device

Link to video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0wP1GSLa_AY

Next I'm working on using the motors bushes and commutator to power the electromagnet coils.

@ Centraflow and Erfinder, looks like you're right about the RF and looking into Resonance would be one of the next steps. Hopefully in time I'll catch up ;)

Luc

Please take your time with this one Luc.  The fact that you are producing RF and have no commutation should have your spider sense tingling.....the only thing that could be the source of the RF that I can think of is the instantaneous transition of a sine to a square.  You might not be in the position to see the transition, with this config, but I can promise you that that is what is taking place.  If what I am suggesting is true, then you will need to rethink resonance.  If what I am suggesting about the wave transitions is correct, and I believe I am, you can begin to appreciate that you are witnessing the birth of a commutation method in which a physical commutator isn't needed. You are witnessing what the old heads saw in mag amps, and what some fringe thinkers have ignorantly labeled quantum (my opinion).  The wave you show has lots of what some would call noise, but look at it, its organized.  Slow those disturbances down, provide those voltage swings with the greatest possible opposition to changes in voltage, via the proper rectification mechanism and observe the instantaneous transition of the wave to a perfectly rectangular nature, even a short circuit should allow you a brief gimps of a squared wave.  Once you experience that, you will never be the same, and we will officially be operating on the same page.  Your system is built around closed magnetic circuits, mine is a hybrid, a healthy balance of air and iron.

The aforementioned suggestions should be considered prior to looking into resonance.  If your sine wave is going square, then forcing the system to output a simple sine is counter productive.  With that being said, before you start thinking about incorporating resonance as its taught, you might want to think about what it means and how it applies to your present situation.  Changes in current and potential are no longer following a sine, transitions are instant, resonance as we understand it and presently apply it is of little or no use here. 


Regards

Quote from: Erfinder on 2015.01.03, 23:14:17
Please take your time with this one Luc.  The fact that you are producing RF and have no commutation should have your spider sense tingling...

Yes Luc, there is way more going on here.  You know the RPMs are too low to be doing the obvious.

Please work with Erfinder on this Luc and consider a concept that I'm going to name, a "Magnetic Spark".  I'm calling it that because of the gap in the C-core, where I think something very interesting and unusual is happening.  This is just a name for now, when we can clearly identify the phenomena, we'll adjust accordingly.  I bring this up because somewhere I recall an experiment with a large toroidal transformer that had a single cut with various isolated windings on it.  With this device I do vaguely remember seeing what I thought at the time were anomalous impulses.  Think about a rotating magnetic field within the core that has to build at the gap, then jump having some characteristics of a flyback transformer, but in this case, there is only one gap, not two.

Anyway, take it slow and careful.  There may be things here in this device you do not want to overlook.

Hi Luc and All

Thanks for the nice video as usual O0. Yes the RF aspect was expected ;) the stator which is a loop with a capacitive connection (the cut) albeit very small capacitance, has I expect a very large current running through it, or will have if the rotor inputs at the resonant frequency of the magnetic loop.

It would be interesting to be able to vary the capacitance at the ends of the loop (across the stator cut), this would vary the resonant frequency of the loop (parallel resonant circuit), as I have stated before, at resonance there will circulate many hundreds of amps in that loop/capacitor circuit. Please look up magnetic loop antennas and you will understand a little more ;)

I have always said that there is a possibility of generating huge amounts of energy from magnetic loops, this just might be the way to do it with careful experimentation. Now I have also said that measurements of the apparatus is important as found by Mr. German, we are dealing with wave lengths here and tuning (RF) is of uttermost importance for it to work at its maximum. We need not to have reflected power (equal to a BEMF).

More to come

regards

Mike 8)

Hey guys, thought this maybe useful about pickup. Just how I'm measuring finding the best pick up points. I'm trying to understand this gen but it still puzzles me. Im surprised for instance that the effect seems to travel through the magnet. http://youtu.be/ihwID-Fzrzg

Hi everyone,

I made a new version of lumen's Ramadan variation which I call Thane Heins Ramadan Bitt version.

The good news is high current coils can be used and the power dissipated in the core has dropped from 33 Watts (first lumen version) to 10 Watts.
We are also delivering 5 Watts to our 1 Ohm load without the prime mover input power increase.

Link to test video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9LK2C4qBY1Y

I would say this is encouraging and further testing and use of better cores like Iron Powder would be on the list to do.

Share your thought if you wish

Luc

Quote from: gotoluc on 2015.01.05, 22:04:50
Hi everyone,

I made a new version of lumen's Ramadan variation which I call Thane Heins Ramadan Bitt version.

The good news is high current coils can be used and the power dissipated in the core has dropped from 33 Watts (first lumen version) to 10 Watts.
We are also delivering 5 Watts to our 1 Ohm load without the prime mover input power increase.

Link to test video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j7GlRvM-8vk

I would say this is encouraging and further testing and use of better cores like Iron Powder would be on the list to do.

Share your thought if you wish

Luc

I have performed this exact same test....in this config it appears as if you have one face of the magnet aimed at the table, and the other face is attached to your C core.  If this is true, then both legs of your C core should have the same polarity, this is the same kind of topology we find in alternators.  The difference here is you are only using one side of the magnet.....a good thing.....if you used both sides, you know what you would have. 

Assuming your coils when energized, produce alternating polarity, do you see the magnetic switch?  I did when I experimented with this topology.....do you see the significance, how drag can be circumvented, not through bending the laws, comprehending them and applying them  properly?

In my opinion, this has absolutely nothing to do with Thane's work, this is something else!  For the first time, as far as I can tell, the basic principles of real magic is being discussed, right here, right now in the public domain, the significance of an all like pole topology is being openly discussed, without folks even recognizing it!  What you have here is just the beginning....dig deeper.....please!


Regards

Thanks for the reply and details Erfinder,

Interestingly enough my next test was adding both a N - S magnet on the fixed C core.

Link to video:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8h-MTjJ44v8

We're going to have to try to figure out why I seem to have different result then you've previously had or observed?

Thanks for the interesting exchange.

Luc

Got a scope on things, similar waveform to Luc's without all the power ;D
http://youtu.be/tSM57l4DKJE

Sorry!

Quote from: wattsup on 2015.01.07, 13:05:45
Maybe the late @JackH can help.

http://jackh.pbworks.com/w/page/12094194/FrontPage

http://purco.qc.ca/ftp/Inventors/Jack-W-Hildenbrand/

http://purco.qc.ca/ftp/Inventors/Jack-W-Hildenbrand/MagnetExtraPower-1.wmv - This is what you can use for magnetic flux switching MEG... That would be interesting to see if someone could place coils instead of C core and half sine wave generator for driving coil there :)

Cheers!

http://overunity.com/833/hilden-brand-magnet-motor/msg22925/#msg22925

(http://peswiki.com/images/9/91/Hilden-Brand_electromagnetic_valve.gif)

Hi everyone,

I was doing tests yesterday with the Ramadan Bitt configuration trying to understand why each coil was behaving differently under load or shorted.
This may be of importance?
What I found was, only the left coil when shorted would cause the prime mover to drop in input power if the right coil was under a 1 Ohm load.
When I reversed the scenario, left coil on load and right coil shorted it would not cause the prime mover input power to drop.
So after more pocking around I found the left coil wire is shorted to the core, so the layer of protective tape I first added when winding the coil wire must of been compromised.

I made a video of it so we can have a reference of the effect before taking the coil off and rewinding them over better core protection.

Link to video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EEPo97MKpUg

I will rewind the coils and re-test to see if I can get the same effect without the coil shorting to the core.

Stay tuned for the update.

Luc

Well, it now looks like the shorted coil to core was fooling me. I've re-isolated the cores and re-wound the coils and now it operates just like a normal Generator. So now shorting one coil when the other is 1 Ohm loaded no longer drops the input power, it actually increases the input!

The only thing that does decrease the input power is by adding the cores to the unloaded coil base which I demonstrated in my last video.
However, as pointed out by dragon at EF, the cores are coupling the opposite pole (drill plate) on that side of the C core which relieves the rotor to core drag.
We may say great that's still a saving but it's not, since if I remove the 1 Ohm load the prime mover input is lowered by that amount and if I connect the load once again, there's close to 6 watts increase to input to deliver 5 watts to the 1 Ohm load.
So it now seems there's nothing out of the ordinary going on in this Bitt version of the Ramadan device.

I'll be resuming my tests on the thngr's simple version.

Luc

  Thanks, Luc, for doing the tests and telling us the results - no matter how these turn out!  O0

Best wishes for your further testing... 

Thanks Luc, great work as usuall, has been interesting following so far, despite the outcome.

Happy New Year & Thanks for sharing your work.
Peter

Thank you gentlemen for posting your interest

We are not done yet!

Luc

Rigged up a makeshift U core last night and did some tests. Looks promising and certainly worthy of more investigation.

Anyone had any thoughts on a variable reluctance core material?

Dear All.

May I present the T-1000 motor Mk 1  O0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9STbGa5zvpg

Cheers Grum.

Quote from: Grumage on 2015.01.12, 14:44:24
May I present the T-1000 motor Mk 1  O0

Hmm, the flux from the magnets is forced to return through the air over a long distance :(
Also, are you using ferrite to avoid eddy currents?

Do you think less turns and more amps in your coils will result in higher attraction force of the rotor pieces?
If "yes" then you should know that 2A and 60turns will produce the same attraction force on the rotor as 20A and 6turns because the magnetic flux is proportional to ampturns (120AT in both cases).

However the L/R time constant will be longer in the former case because the self inductance is proportional to the square of turns while the resistance is proportional to the length of the wire (effectively the number of turns). So in the former case the inductance will be 100x higher then in the latter but the resistance will be only 10x higher.

If you forgot why the L/R constant matters then read this (http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=2684.msg43692#msg43692) for a refresher.

Quote from: verpies on 2015.01.12, 16:53:24
Hmm, the flux from the magnets is forced to return through the air over a long distance :(
Also, are you using ferrite to avoid eddy currents?

The magnetic flux is being shorted between magnets by intention to cut it from coil in middle of induction cycle then introduce same magnetic polarity as coil gets in another half of cycle (the opposite magnetic polarity from first half of cycle)
The Mk1 model has iron blades on rotor with lots of Eddy current loss. We are under way to fix that with laminated transformer steel isolated stacks. The rotor function is to transfer magnetic field between magnet and coil and between two magnets.
Also please notice almost free spinning of rotor when Grum turns it by hand, there are 16(!) strong magnets on stator and the balance of forces are quite good enough for free wheeling... ;)
As soon as we replace rotor blades with <5% Eddy current loss core stacks the input amperage should drop to almost nominal driving pulse motor consumption and the induction on coils have no way to slow it down.

Cheers!

Quote from: T-1000 on 2015.01.12, 19:37:41
The magnetic flux is being shorted between magnets

Every magnet has two ends

Quote from: T-1000 on 2015.01.12, 19:37:41
... the induction on coils have no way to slow it down.

Why?

The each magnet on stator has one polarity facing to rotor and another is open ended.
The relationship between induction magnetic forces and kinetic force of rotor movement is on 90 degrees. This makes perfect isolation between two processes happening in generator.

Quote from: Grumage on 2015.01.12, 14:44:24
Dear All.

May I present the T-1000 motor Mk 1  O0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9STbGa5zvpg

Cheers Grum.

Positively fantastic Grum!    O0

Can you do one simple test for me...

Connect a 10 ohm resistor to each coil, get a summed volt/amp reading for these and compare against your ~ 12 watt input (check it or set it exact).

I have a strong feeling you have near unity Pout if not more.   ;)  If it does happen to "look" like more, keep the champagne in the bottle for a moment, because the wave form may not be a perfect sine wave, which means power isn't exact.  However, there's enough brain power here at OUR to figure out what to do next.

So far though, I see one heck of a good Proof of Concept.

Would it be possible to take accurate temperature reading logs during the run and change of the variables ?

I am interested to know if the heat produced is > < or = to direct resistive heating from the same electrical Pin (Power IN)

O0

Quote from: T-1000 on 2015.01.12, 19:47:25
The each magnet on stator has one polarity facing to rotor and another is open ended.

Yes but what happens to the flux from the open end?

Quote from: T-1000 on 2015.01.12, 19:47:25
The relationship between induction magnetic forces and kinetic force of rotor movement is on 90 degrees. This makes perfect isolation between two processes happening in generator.

This is hard for me to understand. 
What is a "kinetic force" ?   What is a "induction magnetic force" ?  Do you mean the electromotive force caused by Faraday's induction?

The kinetic force is on spinning rotor and the induced magnetic force (Lenz) is between coil and magnet caused by change of magnetic field strength from magnet. Which is caused by change of magnetic flux resistance(permeability) between coil and magnet by rotor movement...

Great to see all the threads on the forums all of a sudden getting active. Thanks to your great builds grum, luc & dragon at ef.

What I can tell you with my latest build having the iron director pass between like poles will double to triple the output. The way I'm currently configuring it in say a design like dragons at ef is to simply have a mag of the same pole at the outer end of a coil core. I remembered the effect from one of luc older experiments showing the effect of same poles facing on solenoids. Also some similar effects  in some jack hb based test I did. 

I'm trying to visualize what is going on by watching all ken wheelers vids:)

Anyway something else for the theorists to do some heavy lifting on :)  if we can understand it or if I can get confirmation that would help. I'll do a scope tomorrow after work.

Verpies, are you willing to continue your excellent essay about inductor energy transfer http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=2684.msg43692#msg43692 ?   ;) I'm sure we all will learn a lot if you do that !

I have related question . If we know all parameters like inductance of coil, time of shorting , time of disconnecting, voltage of the source and capacitance of capacitor - can we compute the end voltage on capacitor as a function of current in inductor exactly at the end of Toff (disconnect time) ?
Verpies, you posted about the timing 0.5757tau  where tau is R/L constant . Does the equation E=L*I^2/2  energy stored in magnetic field always apply , also in the 0.5757tau time moment ?
If Toff is short (less then 1/4 of the period of resonant frequency of LC) - like 0.5757tau , how to compute the amount of energy transfered from coil to the capacitor and the final voltage ? Let assume that the coil is connected in series with power source so the generated EMF add to the power source in moment of disconnecting.
This is in essence Tesla method and also used in DC converters, but theer is always analysed with full wave frequency and duty cycle , never using single pulse.

Quote from: forest on 2015.01.13, 12:02:46
If we know all parameters like inductance of coil, time of shorting , time of disconnecting, voltage of the source and capacitance of capacitor - can we compute the end voltage on capacitor as a function of current in inductor exactly at the end of Toff (disconnect time) ?

Yes, if the resistive losses are neglected (e.g. because the transfer of energy from the coil to capacitor happens very quickly) then the final voltage in the capacitor will be V = i*SQRT(L / C)
I wrote about this here (http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=2684.msg43698#msg43698).

Quote from: forest on 2015.01.13, 12:02:46
Verpies, you posted about the timing 0.5757tau  where tau is L/R constant.

Oh, the nuances of the English language.
Tau is a "time constant" in the equation but it does not mean that Tau is constant in all circumstances.
In fact the Tau "constant" can be variable if inductance (L) or resistance (R) changes in time, because e.g.: a soft ferro core moves closer to the coil or the wire heats up, respectively.  That's what parametric systems are all about.

Quote from: forest on 2015.01.13, 12:02:46
Does the equation E=L*I^2/2  energy stored in magnetic field always apply , also in the 0.5757tau time moment ?

Yes, but it should not be named that way.   It is the energy stored in an entire coil/inductor system (not only in its H magnetic field).
This distinction is meaningless in an air coil, but as soon as a soft ferro/ferrimagnetic core is introduced in the neighborhood of the coil, then the polarization of the domains inside that core (M) also has to be accounted for.
That is why I like to think of the ½Li² as the total magnetic energy of the coil system.

Quote from: forest on 2015.01.13, 12:02:46
If Toff is short (less then 1/4 of the period of resonant frequency of LC) - like 0.5757tau , how to compute the amount of energy transferred from coil to the capacitor and the final voltage ?

Also by using the relation V = i*SQRT(L / C) where "i" is the instantaneous current flowing in the coil at the moment of disconnect.
If you cannot measure this current then you can calculate it from the Transient State (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RLC_circuit#Transient_response) equations of the Circuit theory.

Quote from: forest on 2015.01.13, 12:02:46
Let assume that the coil is connected in series with power source so the generated EMF add to the power source in moment of disconnecting.

That is an imprecise assumption because you did not write what type of the power source it is, e.g. a constant current or constant voltage power supply.
Such power supplies have very different internal impedances.  Depending which one it is a coil in series with it, is either powered or shorted.

Nontheless, the energy stored in the coil system can be recovered and returned to the power supply.
I do it all the time in my lossless clamps circuits, which return the energy of switching spikes to the power supply, instead of wasting them as heat in RC snubbers or Transorbs or Transils or Zener diodes, etc...
See the schematic below (the orange windings and C3, C4, D3, D4 form these lossless clamps)

Quote from: forest on 2015.01.13, 12:02:46
Verpies, are you willing to continue your essay about inductor energy transfer http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=2684.msg43692#msg43692 ?   ;)

Yes.
If you want to help, divide E_L by E_R and graph it in time (expressed in Taus)

(http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=2678.0;attach=16014)

Dear Verpies.

WELCOME BACK   I think we have all missed your valuable technical input !!  O0

Now this one is for you and the other members to think about !!   :D

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uzdf8kOfSow

I'm a little perplexed, but that is quite easy !!  :)

Cheers Grum.

Hi Grumage,

thanks for the video demo O0

Brad (TinMan) recently did a video to demonstrate you can get voltage and current from a coils core. There is a capacitive effect between coil and core which is interesting.

In dragons prototype all his coil cores are linked together (motor ring stator) which boosts the Inductance which results in a better output. I think that's what you're doing by adding the steel bar.
I could not see if your current would change when you did this?

Thanks for sharing your experiments

Luc

Quote from: Grumage on 2015.01.13, 20:02:10
Now this one is for you and the other members to think about !!   :D
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uzdf8kOfSow
I'm a little perplexed, but that is quite easy !!  :)

The big difference between sticking a permanent magnet vs. Gary shield to the core is caused by the permeability of one vs the other.
Please remember that the permeability of permanent magnets is close to air - strange but true.  This is caused by the fact that the domains in permanent magnets cannot move easily.  In steel, iron or ferrite - they can.

You have huge stray fields because you have no flux return path of low reluctance from your permanent magnets.  I already pointed out that all permanent magnets have two ends that need to be taken care of.
Any permeable object will affect these stray fields.

Now, the change that you observe while touching the core with your fingers requires more analysis.  I recommend that you concentrate on that and attach various capacitors and resistors between the steel cores and other metal/conductive elements of your system (...and to some grounded water pipe, too, if your power supply provides galvanic isolation).

verpies

I don't understand your equations. I thought that energy in coil magnetic field is E=0.5*L*I^2 and the current flowing into inductor is described by equation :

as in this graphic : http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/electric/imgele/indt3.gif

I=Imax*(1-e^-R*t/L), where Imax=U/R as per Ohm law

:o

Quote from: forest on 2015.01.14, 16:49:12
I don't understand your equations. I thought that energy in coil magnetic field is E=0.5*L*I^2

Yes, it is but in this equation the current does not vary in time like the real current.

Quote from: forest on 2015.01.14, 16:49:12
and the current flowing into inductor is described by equation :
I=Imax*(1-e^-R*t/L), where Imax=U/R as per Ohm law

Yes, it is but this equation gives you instantaneous current as a function of time - not energy

Substitute the "I" in the first equation with the "I" from the second equation and you will get my equation of instantaneous energy stored in the coil (E_L) since the beginning ...as a function of time.

Quote from: Grumage on 2015.01.13, 20:02:10
Dear Verpies.

WELCOME BACK   I think we have all missed your valuable technical input !!  O0

Now this one is for you and the other members to think about !!   :D

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uzdf8kOfSow

I'm a little perplexed, but that is quite easy !!  :)

Cheers Grum.

Experimenting is a blast!

I'll agree with Verpies on his explanation for the change in voltage by applying a magnet or ferrous material (including the croc-clip). Adding permeable ferrous material increases the core inductance so the voltage also increases.
Adding a magnet has the opposite effect because the magnet's field stiffens many of the magnetic domains of the core. They are being attracted by the magnet. You would have the same result if you replaced some of the core with air.

When you short an open coil and see the drive power requirements decrease consider what is happening to the magnetic domains of the core. An open coil means all of the core can be attracted to the passing magnet. A shorted coil means fewer core magnetic domains are free to be attracted to the passing magnet. Why? Because, completing the circuit creates an electromagnet. The result is less drag and less energy required to drive the rotor. 

On the voltage increase with touch of a finger... I imagine the slightest pressure changes the rotor/coil gap enough to change the voltage. It wouldn't take much movement to cause a sizable voltage change.

Quote from: verpies on 2015.01.14, 17:52:40
Yes, it is but in this equation the current does not vary in time like the real current.
Yes, it is but this equation gives you instantaneous current as a function of time - not energy

Substitute the "I" in the first equation with the "I" from the second equation and you will get my equation of instantaneous energy stored in the coil (E_L) since the beginning ...as a function of time.

I've done that, but I got different equation with 1 and e^ changed position so I asked  :-\  You posted (e^tau-1)^2 while I got (1-e^tau)^2. Is this diffeence due to discharging energy coil instead of charging ???
The second equation : Er is the energy dissipated in resistance of coil ?

Quote from: WaveWatcher on 2015.01.15, 01:27:34
Experimenting is a blast!

I'll agree with Verpies on his explanation for the change in voltage by applying a magnet or ferrous material (including the croc-clip). Adding permeable ferrous material increases the core inductance so the voltage also increases.
Adding a magnet has the opposite effect because the magnet's field stiffens many of the magnetic domains of the core. They are being attracted by the magnet. You would have the same result if you replaced some of the core with air.

When you short an open coil and see the drive power requirements decrease consider what is happening to the magnetic domains of the core. An open coil means all of the core can be attracted to the passing magnet. A shorted coil means fewer core magnetic domains are free to be attracted to the passing magnet. Why? Because, completing the circuit creates an electromagnet. The result is less drag and less energy required to drive the rotor. 

On the voltage increase with touch of a finger... I imagine the slightest pressure changes the rotor/coil gap enough to change the voltage. It wouldn't take much movement to cause a sizable voltage change.

The magnet and coil is stationary. Only core on rotor is moving between them. Also you might ignored electrostatic properties whe Grum touched core with his finger. Considered all what is in video the coils are having induced energy with the same properties as BEMF and Tesla coil have...

Quote from: T-1000 on 2015.01.15, 08:21:49
The magnet and coil is stationary. Only core on rotor is moving between them. Also you might ignored electrostatic properties whe Grum touched core with his finger. Considered all what is in video the coils are having induced energy with the same properties as BEMF and Tesla coil have...

I stand corrected on what part is stationary. The result is the same. The coil sees a changing magnetic field.
As far as possible capacitive/static effects, I'll leave those up to Grum to determine via experiment.

My suggestion that touch causing deflection is the cause of voltage change is valid but only a suggestion.
Grum appears to be a very skilled experimenter so he can determine the actual cause.

Quote from: forest on 2015.01.15, 05:53:03
I got (1-e^tau)^2. Is this diffeence due to discharging energy coil instead of charging ???

No.
Analyze what will happen with your equation when Tau=∞
(1-e^Tau)²  ↔  (1-e^∞)²  → (1-∞)² → (-∞)² → +∞
so according to your equation, the energy stored in the inductance increases with time ad infinitum, even if the current does not  :o
...but Alas! we know that this is not true experimentally because after a very long time the current flowing in a series LR circuit stabilizes at the V/R limit and the energy stored in the inductance stabilizes with it in the same manner.
The key to solving that conundrum is remembering about that sign of exponent and that (1-a)² = (a-1)² and that R/L= 1/Tau...

Quote from: forest on 2015.01.15, 05:53:03
The second equation : E_R is the energy dissipated in resistance of coil ?

Yes, including any resistance deliberately connected to the coil in series.
However I am surprised you have asked that, because  E_R is explained in the Legend (http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=2684.msg43692#msg43692).

Quote from: WaveWatcher on 2015.01.15, 10:49:20
My suggestion that touch causing deflection is the cause of voltage change is valid but only a suggestion.

...and a good one at that.
I did not even think about it.

Dear All.

Mystery solved.

As WaveWatcher quite rightly suggested slight pressure on the top of the soft Iron core causes a change in the voltage. There is a little flexibility in the Plastic that forms the top coil carrier plate, I tried touching the side of the core delicately, no change detected.

So, moving on, I have nearly 18 W dissipation.  1.34 volts RMS into 0.1 Ohm Carbon non inductive resistor = 17.96 Watts.  So there is going to be 13.4 Amps circulating ?  My question, why, after 30 mins of running the coil shorted, was there no detectable temperature rise ??
My solid Soft Iron rotor plates rose in temperature from 18.5 C ambient to nearly 26 C over the same time period.

Does anyone have any suggestions for a method of extracting this " Ghost " current, as I have named it ?!!

Cheers Grum.

Quote from: Grumage on 2015.01.15, 13:05:49
1.34 volts RMS into 0.1 Ohm Carbon non inductive resistor = 17.96 Watts.  
So there is going to be 13.4 Amps circulating ?

Yup, there is no escaping that calculation unless the 0.1Ω resistor is inductive or the RMS averaging curcuit is faulty or incapable of operating at that frequency.

You could dispel the latter by showing one or two cycles of the waveform on a scope screen (calibrated display with HiZ input!)
You can verify that the resistor is really non-inductive by feeding it with 100kHz rectangular wave and observing on a scope that the voltage measured across this resistor is also rectangular.

Also, don't let the stray fluctuating magnetic field (dΦ/dt) of your motor induce a voltage in your test equipment!  Keep the distance or shield it well.

Quote from: Grumage on 2015.01.15, 13:05:49
My question, why, after 30 mins of running the coil shorted, was there no detectable temperature rise ??

That is unusual.
Put 13.4 Amps DC through that resistor and report a difference in its heating behavior.
Most in-circuit multimeters can measure DC Amps very accurately.  Avoid the clamp-on types.

Dear Verpies and all.

I have put together a short video of the test.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s95CwLmqB-0

I know you will tell me where I have gone wrong !!  ;)  :)

Cheers Grum.

Ok, scratch this one, Gyula spotted I had a 100 Ohm resistor not 0.1 !!  :-[

Quote from: verpies on 2015.01.15, 11:13:00
No.
Analyze what will happen with your equation when Tau=∞
(1-e^Tau)²  ↔  (1-e^∞)²  → (1-∞)² → (-∞)² → +∞
so according to your equation, the energy stored in the inductance increases with time ad infinitum, even if the current does not  :o
...but Alas! we know that this is not true experimentally because after a very long time the current flowing in a series LR circuit stabilizes at the V/R limit and the energy stored in the inductance stabilizes with it in the same manner.
The key to solving that conundrum is remembering about that sign of exponent and that (1-a)² = (a-1)² and that R/L= 1/Tau...
Yes, including any resistance deliberately connected to the coil in series.
However I am surprised you have asked that, because  E_R is explained in the Legend (http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=2684.msg43692#msg43692).

Sory, I mised Er in legend. However I still wonder what you have as tau because I assume : tau= -(R*t)/L and 1-e^tau where tau -> infinity become simply 1.
In other words what was your assumption to use e^tau-1 ? Is this the part of equation of decaying magnetic field from coil ?

The link I posted explains well the transient in coil but assume we consider only charging inductor with current. In general common available equations and explanations are not enough to contruct any overunity device because they do not explain in details step by step what is happening in inductor and capacitor in resonant circuit.
I believe Tesla used only equations and custom made tools and got incredible results. The same could be done today if someone understand theory very well and is able to compute veird things  about LC tank circuits. For example Tesla experimented a lot to find equation for computing distributing capacitance.

Quote from: forest on 2015.01.15, 19:36:48
However I still wonder what you have as Tau because I assume : Tau= -(R*t)/L

No, Tau=L/R
However the exponent is ^-(t*R)/L and this transforms to ^-t*(R/L) which is the same as ^-t/(L/R)  and that is simply ^-t/Tau
Now, if you express the time in Tau (in other words: normalize the t to Tau) then the whole exponent becomes just ^-Tau

Quote from: forest on 2015.01.15, 19:36:48
and 1-e^tau where tau -> infinity become simply 1.

e raised to an infinite power is very large... also infinite

Quote from: forest on 2015.01.15, 19:36:48
In other words what was your assumption to use e^tau-1 ?

It is not an assumption.  It is a result.
I can use (e^-TAU - 1)² instead of  (1 - e^-TAU)² because these two expressions are always equal
I chose the former because that term appeared in my other equations and I wanted all of them to be symmetrical.

Quote from: forest on 2015.01.15, 19:36:48
The link I posted explains well the transient in coil but assume we consider only charging inductor with current.

Actually these equations are for charging an inductor from a constant voltage source.

Quote from: forest on 2015.01.15, 19:36:48
In general common available equations and explanations are not enough to construct any overunity device

Of course they are not, but they are accurate nonetheless ...quantitatively.

Quote from: forest on 2015.01.15, 19:36:48
they do not explain in details step by step what is happening in inductor and capacitor in resonant circuit.

They do quantitatively.
For an exhaustive qualitative explanation without auxiliary concepts, such as fields, flux, charge, etc... you'd need to revamp your understanding of space and time.  Especially the notion of space and time as containers in which matter swims.  I don't think you are ready for that.
BTW: Space / Time = Motion.

Quote from: forest on 2015.01.15, 19:36:48
I believe Tesla used only equations and custom made tools and got incredible results.

From the point of view of his contemporary peers his results were truly incredible.

Quote from: forest on 2015.01.15, 19:36:48
The same could be done today if someone understands theory very well and is able to compute weird things about LC tank circuits.

Well, there might be some weird things about ferromagnetic or ferrimagnetic inductors with movable core.
But these equations will not be invalidated for ordinary RL circuits without these features.

Quote from: forest on 2015.01.15, 19:36:48
For example Tesla experimented a lot to find equation for computing distributing capacitance.

I will not go there in this thread. Distributed capacitance, distributed inductance, transmission line theory, standing waves, etc...belong to other threads.
Here I will limit myself only to pulse motors: magnetostatics and magnetodynamics, electronics and circuit theory of RC, RL and LCR circuits.

Quote from: Grumage on 2015.01.15, 18:45:29
Dear Verpies and all.

I have put together a short video of the test.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s95CwLmqB-0

I know you will tell me where I have gone wrong !!  ;)  :)

Cheers Grum.

Ok, scratch this one, Gyula spotted I had a 100 Ohm resistor not 0.1 !!  :-[

In spite of having a higher resistance you should consider that a shorted coil is a very reactive device. You can have quite high current and still not generate a lot of heat because the current will be lagging voltage.
This adds Power Factor to your use of Ohm's Law. Of course, DC Ohm's law won't work anyway because you have changing magnetic fields.

You can bet that the rotor is heating primarily due to the Eddy currents being induced in the plates.

Still, great job! This IS the best way to learn what is going on.

Quote from: WaveWatcher on 2015.01.15, 23:12:43
In spite of having a higher resistance you should consider that a shorted coil is a very reactive device. You can have quite high current and still not generate a lot of heat because the current will be lagging voltage.

Not in a non-inductive load resistor

Quote from: Grumage on 2015.01.15, 18:45:29
Ok, scratch this one, Gyula spotted I had a 100 Ohm resistor not 0.1 !!  :-[

Bad boys raped our young girls but Violet gave willingly...get some now.

Quote from: verpies on 2015.01.16, 01:09:44
Not in a non-inductive load resistor

A shorted coil is still an inductor.

Besides, even an inductive resistor of that size and value range shouldn't have enough inductance to matter at those frequencies.

Quote from: Grumage on 2015.01.15, 18:45:29
Dear Verpies and all.

I have put together a short video of the test.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s95CwLmqB-0

I know you will tell me where I have gone wrong !!  ;)  :)

Cheers Grum.

Ok, scratch this one, Gyula spotted I had a 100 Ohm resistor not 0.1 !!  :-[

Thanks for making this new video Grum

A few pointers. I see your scope can display data. If you can select VRMS instead of VPP it would be better for power calculation. Also, the way most scopes displays data is based on what you see in the window. To get more reliable numbers, you would need more samples (20 or so) will give you a better result. One or 2 samples like you did in your video would not be considered to be enough for a reliable data but is good when we want to look at the shape of the waveform.
Your voltage divisions could of been set one division lower so the waveform doesn't fill the screen as much, again this would be for more accurate data. But again, if you wan to just look at the waveform then it's okay.

Fine details but if you want to present information to .99, TK and MileHigh that they will consider, then these are the pointers they've taught me over the years!... oh, and I just remembered a real important one. Make sure your scope probe setting is on DC coupling and not AC coupling even though you are scoping AC.

I kind of knew you resistor was not correct the first time. I thought you would check it with your meter after I mentioned if it was a 0.1 Ohms it would be so hot you would not be able to handle it like you did. Glad you eventually found the problem.

So it looks like you had up to 5vpp which is about 3.5vrms across 100 Ohms = 0.122 Watts

Thanks for sharing your great research and being open to suggestions

Luc

Sorry!

@wattsup

The build I described in http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=2678.msg43271#msg43271 , http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=2678.msg43377#msg43377 and following makes the induced magnetic force from coil to become pushing in whole cycle which allows us to manipulate it in way we want (help to rotor rotation as one of examples).
The BEMF cycle becomes in middle of iron core passage cycle from one magnet to other and this is where you see dampened sine wave. On this point of time there is magnetic attraction part just it does not effect rotor movement in any way due 90 degrees angle between rotation and coil/magnet.
This concept with following build was realized by Grum and I am very pleased to see many confirmations of behavior expectations. :)
There are things to improve as always just I know we are on right path... Hopefully that gives insight to you what we are after.

P.S> The E. Leedskalnin generator is where this concept was hidden.. You might try to study it from shattered pieces close as possible.
Cheers!

@T-1000
I get the build but I don't get the Modus Operandi
Could you elucidate ?

Quote from: verpies on 2015.01.18, 23:20:49
@T-1000
I get the build but I don't get the Modus Operandi
Could you elucidate ?

For http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faraday%27s_law_of_induction there are two ways to create magnetic flux change in coil:
1) By moving magnet or coil relatively to each other
2) By changing magnetic flux path permeability which changes resulting magnetic field strength on coil (The classic example - magnetic amplifiers http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_amplifier )

For full induction cycle of sine wave we need two induced magnetic polarities followed one after another.
In the first case the weakening magnetic field of moving magnet/coil creates opposite polarity in coil than it was when magnetic field strength was increasing. This results resistive deflection in coil on magnetic field strength increase and attraction when magnetic field strength weakens. Because that is caused directly by approaching and leaving magnet/coil the magnetic force from coil induction magnetic reaction (Lenz force) go against movement due same vector aliment with the movement - the classic situation.

On the second case it gets different because coil and magnet are static and any change in magnetic flux path permeability can be done in a way where the resulting magnetic forces between coil and magnet are isolated from force which change the magnetic field strength on coil. Also for a full induction cycle it is best to have changing magnetic polarity from two opposite magnets what go along induced magnetic polarities on coil which also have it changing over each full sine cycle. Also the point in time where the magnetic field is weakening on coil is on middle of movement cycle between two magnetic polarities of magnets so the magnetic attraction is redirected to that point of time. This allows us to have resulting net magnetic deflection when iron core on rotor is approaching coil and also when it is leaving coil (this is opposite from first case). So the build on which we are working on has that in design.

P.S> Wish we could have voice conversation so it would avoid lengthy typing with explanations...

Cheers!

Quote from: T-1000 on 2015.01.18, 23:51:27
1) By moving magnet or coil relatively to each other

That is a very conventional setup.  According to 200y of engineering experience it takes more work to approach the coil by a magnet then to depart it, unless the coil is open or ideal and shorted.  I am currently discussing with Cyril his idea to overcome that.

Quote from: T-1000 on 2015.01.18, 23:51:27
2) By changing magnetic flux path permeability which changes resulting magnetic field strength on coil (The classic example - magnetic amplifiers http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_amplifier )

The magnetic amplifier modulates the differential permeability.  Is this what this build is supposed to do?
Or is it supposed to modulate the absolute permeability ?

In any case, how do you accomplish this modulation without expending energy?

Quote from: T-1000 on 2015.01.18, 23:51:27
For full induction cycle of sine wave we need two induced magnetic polarities followed one after another.

Yes if you want a sine wave output.

Quote from: T-1000 on 2015.01.18, 23:51:27
In the first case the weakening magnetic field of moving magnet/coil creates opposite polarity in coil than it was when magnetic field strength was increasing.

Are you referring to the polarity of current flowing in the coil or voltage across the coil ?

Quote from: T-1000 on 2015.01.18, 23:51:27
This results resistive deflection in coil on magnetic field strength increase and attraction when magnetic field strength weakens.

You lost me here because of faulty grammar.  Don't take me wrong - I appreciate that I don't have to decipher that in a language that is foreign to me.

Quote from: T-1000 on 2015.01.18, 23:51:27
On the second case it gets different because coil and magnet are static and any change in magnetic flux path permeability can be done in a way where the resulting magnetic forces between coil and magnet are isolated from force which change the magnetic field strength on coil.

Up until now it always took more energy to modulate the reluctance of magnetic path than the energy gained from the resulting change of flux.  
How do you plan to overcome that cost?

Quote from: T-1000 on 2015.01.18, 23:51:27
Also for a full induction cycle it is best to have changing magnetic polarity from two opposite magnets

OK

Quote from: T-1000 on 2015.01.18, 23:51:27
Also the point in time where the magnetic field is weakening on coil is on middle of movement cycle between two magnetic polarities of magnets so the magnetic attraction is redirected to that point of time. This allows us to have resulting net magnetic deflection when iron core on rotor is approaching coil and also when it is leaving coil (this is opposite from first case).

The grammar is lacking again.  Can you draw a diagram of these forces and their distribution in time?

Quote from: T-1000 on 2015.01.18, 23:51:27
P.S. Wish we could have voice conversation so it would avoid lengthy typing with explanations...

Text is slower but more precise.

@verpies
The English is my secondary language and the best guess for you is to repeat build from my CAD drawing then analyze everything step by step. Hopefully this will help you with understanding on everything what is going on there...

Sorry!

Quote from: wattsup on 2015.01.19, 14:25:48
You see the question is not, "let's take a guess at what we need to know". The question should always only be "what do we need to know". In this build, we already know what the magnet and iron rotor passage will do if you build the system simply in your mind without doing it on the bench. So the question we need to know is "how can we increase output by changing the pick-up method", and since the system like @Grumage is perfect for this type of R&D because the coils are on top and easily accessible to change, this is why I am saying that look man, we already know and knew what a standard wound coil will do, now what will other coil types do and that should be the only question right now.

I'll give you an example to try Grum:

Take some half inch cut slices of copper tubing, various diameters.  Replace your coils with these and observe the RPMs.  Now try this again with some soft iron slugs inserted into these copper tubes.  With enough patience, I think you will find a combination where the Lenz flux created in these tubes actually drives the generator like a motor.  Maybe not completely as in OU, but enough you will get some insight into what this design needs to work more optimally.  I think you will discover the reluctance of the slug within the copper tube makes a huge difference in behavior, different thicknesses, different materials and distance from the keepers.  You may even get to a point where you decide the same needs to be done with the rotating keepers.

I know you didn't start out here to build a magnet motor, but the concepts involved are universal.  If there is "Free Energy" to be had here, you can manifest it several different ways.  The way you will learn the most from this test fixture is the best way, whatever that turns out to be.

Quote from: wattsup on 2015.01.19, 14:25:48
You see the double hump waveform is exactly what I was expecting without a load and you can see the top of the humps are jittering slightly up and down, this is because the rotor plates are not perfectly in their 1/9th position so you see this slight variation or topological imperfection on the scope.

I agree with this statement completely.
I also expected the double hump waveform because the voltage induced across the coil is proportional to the rate of change of flux (dΦ/dt) and the flux changes the quickest when the soft ferromagnetic plate is just entering and leaving the gap between the magnet & coil.  When the plate is exactly in the middle between the magnet & coil, then the flux does not change very quickly, although this is the point of the least reluctance (and the highest flux).  This is the reason why there is a dip between these two humps.

If you had measured the current flowing in a coil then you'd see a different waveform.  Such measurement should be done when the coil is shorted by a 0.1Ω current sensing resistor and at high rpm (so the evil resistance does not have the time to dissipate the current).

Please don't go all crazy on the terminology or test method used in this video, as most of us can shoot big holes in it.  Instead, simply look at what he has and see if there is something there we can identify as missing from our experiments:

I cannot even begin without the current waveforms in coils, correlated with the position of the rotor.

Quote from: Matt Watts on 2015.01.22, 08:21:05
Please don't go all crazy on the terminology or test method used in this video, as most of us can shoot big holes in it.  Instead, simply look at what he has and see if there is something there we can identify as missing from our experiments:

I keep saying first you have drag, then you find a way to reduce drag approaching neutrality (Thane appears to have accomplished this mission), we cannot stop here, we must push generator, converting it into a motor.  This is what acceleration under load is, thing is, present demonstrations of the effect are limited.  When you think about it, the effect as we have become identified with it, its as if you trade one resonant frequency for one just a wee bit higher than the one you were operating at.  You get more momentum, but the overall energy stays the same.   What we want is that the device accelerate without limitation, well...that's what I want.  If the input doesn't increase, you're barking up the wrong tree in my opinion. Most say that's counter productive, they don't want the input to go up.

If the prime mover is a pulsed DC machine, one knows exactly which variables need to be kept low so as achieve maximum recovery.  The motor field is not harvested, the effect associated with a change in that field is!  We recover through the mechanism of self induction, induction isn't limited to self induction people.  The collapsing field is a source of flux change, a change which is orders of magnitude faster than a disk packed with magnets.  Think damn it, add that ultra fast changing (collapsing) field inducing ability with the slow as snails induction from all those magnets in the rotor together, a summing which results in higher electrical and mechanical output, the increase in electrical is clear (I hope....), the mechanical will need further clarification, maybe later.....  

My opinion, the ideas being presented by Thane need a face lift.  He should be using a pulsed DC motor as the prime mover and his generator coils should be mutually inductive to the motor coils, if and when this is properly done, the generator coils can be shorted all the time and there is no damn drag at all....stupid..  His mission it seems is to rewrite the law, this is a mistake, there's nothing wrong with the law.


Regards

Quote from: Erfinder on 2015.01.22, 13:01:36
I keep saying first you have drag, then you find a way to reduce drag approaching neutrality (Thane appears to have accomplished this mission), we cannot stop here, we must push generator, converting it into a motor.  This is what acceleration under load is, thing is, present demonstrations of the effect are limited.

Do you think we will run into geometric or material limitations that make this impractical to pursue?

The universe itself seems to run at unity, zero sum.  I really have to wonder sometimes if it's possible from an engineering standpoint to calculate all the right variables and then assemble a device where the tradeoff for this, prevents that and so on.  If you know the answer, it would sure help my motivation.  If I knew the copper wire, magnets, capacitors, etc that I can obtain are plenty sufficient to build such a device that accelerates infinitely, a self-powered series wound motor, I think I would be more inclined to never give up or change directions.  At the moment I think it is possible, but I surely don't know it is possible.  I long for the day when I actually have to make a governor for such a device to keep it from self destructing.

Quote from: Erfinder on 2015.01.22, 13:01:36
Thane need a face lift.  He should be using a pulsed DC motor as the prime mover and his generator coils should be mutually inductive to the motor coils, if and when this is properly done, the generator coils can be shorted all the time and there is no damn drag at all....stupid..  His mission it seems is to rewrite the law, this is a mistake, there's nothing wrong with the law.

Regards

Interesting you mention this, over 5 years ago Thane patented a motor coil with its outside perimeter wrapped by a ReGen-X coil. He has not built it because of its complexity and lack of funds.

Luc

Quote from: Matt Watts on 2015.01.23, 00:05:59
Do you think we will run into geometric or material limitations that make this impractical to pursue?

I think there is a pattern, a quick look around us and we find that this might not be that far off....we are literally drowning in patterns.  Pick one, and allow it the room it needs to adjust to and integrate with its environment. No I do not think we will run into limitations.

Quote from: Matt Watts on 2015.01.23, 00:05:59
The universe itself seems to run at unity, zero sum.  I really have to wonder sometimes if it's possible from an engineering standpoint to calculate all the right variables and then assemble a device where the tradeoff for this, prevents that and so on.  If you know the answer, it would sure help my motivation.  If I knew the copper wire, magnets, capacitors, etc that I can obtain are plenty sufficient to build such a device that accelerates infinitely, a self-powered series wound motor, I think I would be more inclined to never give up or change directions.  At the moment I think it is possible, but I surely don't know it is possible.  I long for the day when I actually have to make a governor for such a device to keep it from self destructing.

For whatever reason we are preoccupied with calculating.  All is number, we cannot calculate it all.  We cannot calculate that which matters.  I want it (the device), when the proper conditions are established, to present the numbers to me. Folks we need to make modifications in how we see things, how we see these systems, we are looking from the material in, whereas we should be looking at it from the perspective of the forces.  The complex impedance, the load, should drive the machine....an idea lost on most. 

The day you long for, when you must govern the machine to keep from self destruction......it's done!


Regards

With motors, it may be just a question of changing the arrangement of windings to take advantage of what Lenz' law offers, rather than seeing it as a hindrance.  If I understand Erfinder correctly, the correct harnessing of both EM induction and BEMF will move our motors into a new paradigm of operation that allows us to envision possibilities for machines that we had previously excluded because we were told these things were not possible.
Bob

Quote from: Erfinder on 2015.01.23, 09:03:03
the load, should drive the machine.


Regards

Agree!

Luc

Quote from: Erfinder on 2015.01.23, 09:03:03
The complex impedance, the load, should drive the machine....an idea lost on most.

As I suspected.

Quote from: Erfinder on 2015.01.23, 09:03:03
The day you long for, when you must govern the machine to keep from self destruction......it's done!

O0

What is left is to put this effect on the benches of people reading this, with a thorough understanding of why and how it does what it does.  This would be knowledge we cannot afford to lose again.

Quote from: Matt Watts on 2015.01.23, 22:41:29
As I suspected.

O0

What is left is to put this effect on the benches of people reading this, with a thorough understanding of why and how it does what it does.  This would be knowledge we cannot afford to lose again.

We have been provided with wonderful more or less self explanatory proof of principle devices which can aid in our understanding.  Those concept devices are not being used as aids, they have become products, building blocks they may have been, today they are reduced to and limited by ignorance in the most terrible sense.  You must ask the following questions, and recognize the provided conclusion for what they are.

Is there a deeper meaning to be associated with the concept of shunt winding?

•   Shunt wound = Parallel Resonant Circuit

Is there a deeper meaning to be associated with the concept of series winding?

•   Series wound = Series Resonant Circuit

Is there a deeper meaning to be associated with the concept of compound winding?

•   Compound wound = Parallel - Series Resonant Circuit

Do I have any proof of this, it's a funny question, one which I don't answer when asked, I respond with a follow up question, do I need proof, can you prove the idea wrong......I don't think you can?

Why would they go through all that trouble to design very specific what some would call resonant circuits, I call them "reactive" circuits, the first catering specifically to either magnetic energy storage, the second to dielectric energy storage, and then a third, a hybrid which combined the two?  Powerful implications....  Resonant implies that the circuits are limited to operating at one specific frequency, were as the term reactive does not, to facilitate runaway, we cannot be limited to one frequency of operation. 

In my most humble of opinions a message was preserved, one which has stood the test of time.  One which is wasted on 99% of us consumers. 

A warning gentlemen and ladies.  My koolaid is bitter.  I don't do numbers, the ones I feel all are chasing are the wrong ones anyway.  The energy I want is in capacitance, born out of the capacitor's opposition to changes in voltage.  Before I can get it out, I have to make the case for capacitance in a situation where there is no case (parasitic capacitance doesn't count).  When that happens fiction replaces fact and fact fiction, in such an instance, a device mentioned in a movie can become real.....(Flux Capacitor.....go on....laugh....Hollywood is probably laughing too...) a coil's inductive property opposes changes in current, reaction to change in current is an induced potential, a potential which rises and falls, opposition to changes in the induced potential result in current.  A greater portion of this induced current is being transmitted via a longitudinally operating magnetic field.  Do I have proof?  No, I just take things for what they are, I observe where I am told to look for the coils capacitance, and note that there's something interesting going on at this location, namely, the magnetic field at this location is bucking.  We aren't ignorant to this, but we don't take advantage of the fact either.
 

Regards

Quote from: Erfinder on 2015.01.24, 07:52:21
Do I have any proof of this, it's a funny question, one which I don't answer when asked, I respond with a follow up question, do I need proof, can you prove the idea wrong......I don't think you can?

That is a well known fallacy:

Lack of proof of wrongness is not a proof of correctness
...in the same manner as:
Lack of proof of existence is not a proof of nonexistence

Quote from: verpies on 2015.01.24, 08:16:33
That is a well known fallacy:

Lack of proof of wrongness is not a proof of correctness
...in the same manner as:
Lack of proof of existence is not a proof of nonexistence

The question is do I need proof?  Why is it required that an "idea" be proven, this is an exchange of ideas not an exchange of proofs.  I asked specific questions relating to three winding configurations, and you challenge what...my closing remark...?  If it make you feel better and helps you progress by calling an out of context reference a fallacy, more power to you, I will loose neither sleep nor respect for you for forming such a conclusion.

Regards

Quote from: Erfinder on 2015.01.24, 08:36:42
The question is do I need proof?  

That depends on what you are trying to accomplish, nonetheless the burden of proof is on you, regardless whether you feel it's required or not.
Preemptively preventing such requirement from your reader by asking them to prove a negative is a transparent debating technique.

Quote from: Erfinder on 2015.01.24, 08:36:42
I asked specific questions relating to three winding configurations, and you challenge what...my closing remark...?

It was not a closing remark.  There are more words after it then before it.
You asked four questions and I replied to one of them.

The others about "deeper meaning to be associated with the concept of series and/or parallel resonant windings" were so ambiguous that they did not warrant an answer from a scientist...maybe a preacher could answer them for you.  Preachers don't like to discuss quantities and numbers either.

Why are you asking questions like this, anyway?  
Are you genuinely seeking answers to these questions or are they rhetorical questions posed in an attempt to teach your readers something?

Quote from: Erfinder on 2015.01.24, 08:36:42
If it make you feel better and helps you progress by calling an out of context reference a fallacy, more power to you, I will loose neither sleep nor respect for you for forming such a conclusion.

You seem to falsely assume that I have objected to this fallacy for your benefit.
No, I have objected for the benefit of others reading your message and getting demotivated by it.

Quote from: verpies on 2015.01.24, 09:17:53
That depends on what you are trying to accomplish, nonetheless the burden of proof is on you, regardless whether you feel it's required it or not.
Preemptively preventing such requirement from your reader by asking them to prove a negative is a transparent debating technique.
No
You seem to falsely assume that I have objected to this fallacy for your benefit.
No, I have objected for the benefit of others reading your message and getting demotivated by it.

I've reserved a spot for you in the front row.  I see you've located the box of rotten tomatoes. I will wait till your arms tire, and they will, when that time comes a real exchange between us can begin.  Till that time arrives, please forgive me for that which may come across as disrespect, namely my choice to ignore your posts.


Regards

Odd, I just gave my affirmation to Erfinder that I would listen, learn and do the experiments he speaks of.  So I come back here after reading some Tesla lectures he recommended and in less than 24 hours I see post 325, in my own thread no less.  Bad form verpies.  Please try to use some restraint.  Maybe I'm the only one that cares what Erfinder has to express.  Be that the case, you are more than welcome to read our dialog, just disconnect your TX signal and all will be good.  Preferably, I'd rather see you contribute.  Here's a statement that would be perfect for you to take a closer look at:

Quote from: ErfinderA greater portion of this induced current is being transmitted via a longitudinally operating magnetic field.

I personally find this a very interesting statement.  I've been working on a device that I named the Lenz Locker Transformer, the objective is to add an alternate flux path for the Lenz flux to take instead of reaching the primary.  I've been testing this device with sharp impulses to get an idea of its inner workings.  One of the things I did that completely surprised me was to wind a pickup coil on this alternate flux path; my expectation is that I would not see any impulse make it's way to this path without a connected circuit on the secondary.  What I discovered was completely opposite.  I actually saw more signal on this pickup coil with the secondary open than I did with it closed.  Which brings me back to Erfinder's statement.  In my test setup, I cannot see any other way this could happen unless what he says is correct.  It also invalidates my understanding that you can only induce a voltage, where current must come from a closed-loop resistance via Ohm's Law.

Quote from: Matt Watts on 2015.01.24, 11:00:51
I personally find this a very interesting statement.  I've been working on a device that I named the Lenz Locker Transformer, the objective is to add an alternate flux path for the Lenz flux to take instead of reaching the primary.  I've been testing this device with sharp impulses to get an idea of its inner workings.  One of the things I did that completely surprised me was to wind a pickup coil on this alternate flux path; my expectation is that I would not see any impulse make it's way to this path without a connected circuit on the secondary.  What I discovered was completely opposite.  I actually saw more signal on this pickup coil with the secondary open than I did with it closed.

When you are working with magnetic flux path switching there are many surprises. One of them is when you establish closed magnetic flux path it stays locked into it but still leaks on alternate path. And if you break loop it switches onto alternate flux path then leaks to previous path:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y252LZt9tqw

Cheers!

Quote from: T-1000 on 2015.01.24, 12:13:14
When you are working with magnetic flux path switching there are many surprises. One of them is when you establish closed magnetic flux path it stays locked into it but still leaks on alternate path. And if you break loop it switches onto alternate flux path then leaks to previous path:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y252LZt9tqw

Cheers!

What interests me the most is that this demonstration is being compared either in word or deed with a circuit where there is no "actual"  closing of the path.........Karl demonstrates that when the path is not closed....air gap....the sought after effect (latching) is not there.  What folks are doing in circuits where the path is open is very different from whats going on in that video.  Also some relate this demonstration to the MEG, also not the same.


Regards

The gaps or different core material introduce resistance to magnetic flux path and if you have coil over it it can decrease or increase flux path resistance by introducing own magnetic field. That was widely used in magnetic amplifiers on 1950s. The thing is still on same fundamentals but more tricks have to be in place to achieve it without moving parts...

Quote from: Matt Watts on 2015.01.24, 11:00:51

Quote from: Erfinder on 2015.01.24, 11:00:51
A greater portion of this induced current is being transmitted via a longitudinally operating magnetic field.
I personally find this a very interesting statement.

It would be interesting if a difference could be demonstrated between "longitudinally operating magnetic field" and transversely operating magnetic field.

Quote from: verpies on 2015.01.24, 15:13:53
It would be interesting if a difference could be demonstrated between "longitudinally operating magnetic field" and transversely operating magnetic field.

Yes, and my guess would be it would look like Instantaneous Action at a Distance, which is a whole other world of exploration.

Sorry!

Hi,

Here is another approach to my design:
http://overunity.com/15083/the-new-generator-no-effect-counter-b-emf-part-2-selfrunning/msg434787/#msg434787
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bTL7Pvtm-3s

The results mean much more than ton of explanations... :)
So far the possibility to self run from generator coils is ahead as seen from possible prolonged spinning of rotor.

P.S> It might be worth to invite MCR to this forum for trolls-free efforts towards same goal... :)

Cheers!

Dear Wattsup.

Not a lack of interest, just having some time out. My problem is that I get obsessive, over Christmas whilst I was building the Gary motor I could still be tinkering into the " Wee small hours " !!

Being a carer for my wife, this will not do !!

So, watch this space, as they say.

Cheers Grum.

Sorry!

This subject is being and has been beat in to the ground, not just here but everywhere, for years.  The interesting thing is it gets attention for a little while and then like all fads its superseded by the next big thing.  Demonstrating this effect doesn't take a degree in particle physics.  We do not need to reinvent the wheel as its been and being suggested.  We need only understand a few basics.  When we comprehend the basics we find that we are not limited to to high inductance, high resistance coils as one authority has pointed out, the coils do not need share a common axis.  We also find that between the rotor and coils there is no need for a magnetic return path.  All things considered the magnetic coupling between the two coils is low.  Stripped of all which has literally blinded us from experiencing the effect as it experiences itself, we see the underlying mechanism, and recognize just how misled we have been.  For the effect to manifest all that is required is the proper orientation of the coil, and connections between coils, and these with relation to the inducing field.  

http://vimeo.com/117820507

I am not saying that whats being discussed and demonstrated doesn't have merit, I am saying why waste time and resources when what we want can be accomplished without all the BS, uh....extra baggage.


Regards

Quote from: Erfinder on 2015.01.26, 18:21:19
http://vimeo.com/117820507

The speedup under short circuit over specific speed is well known in experiments. What is missing there is the speedup under short circuit no matter how low initial speed is.
Also in this thread we are talking about switching of magnetic flux where magnet and coil aren't moving and the coil core material is changing size in the path of magnetic flux between magnet and coil and where no matter what you do with coils it does not introduce cogging to initial rotor rotation... Would be nice to see if you can assemble test unit in same way as it is being talked from post #1 of this thread.. ;)

Cheers!

Quote from: Erfinder on 2015.01.26, 18:21:19
http://vimeo.com/117820507

That's what I'm talking about right there!  Nice demo Erfinder.

Call that reverse drag under load.  Amps too even with those tiny mags.

Just curious though, those big windings, are they heavy insulated wraps, good spacing between conductors?  I ask because I'm very curious as to just how low the self-inductance is.  I'm starting to get it, self-inductance is what is killing us; that's the source of Lenz, just like you said.

Quote from: T-1000 on 2015.01.26, 19:07:47
The speedup under short circuit over specific speed is well known in experiments. What is missing there is the speedup under short circuit no matter how low initial speed is.
Also in this thread we are talking about switching of magnetic flux where magnet and coil aren't moving and the coil core material is changing size in the path of magnetic flux between magnet and coil and where no matter what you do with coils it does not introduce cogging to initial rotor rotation... Would be nice to see if you can assemble test unit in same way as it is being talked from post #1 of this thread.. ;)

Cheers!

The demonstration was lost on you.  The test unit in test one is a complete waste of time, such a unit I have, the one I showed in the video is superior.  To each his own.


Regards

Quote from: Matt Watts on 2015.01.26, 19:35:47
That's what I'm talking about right there!  Nice demo Erfinder.

Call that reverse drag under load.  Amps too even with those tiny mags.

Just curious though, those big windings, are they heavy insulated wraps, good spacing between conductors?  I ask because I'm very curious as to just how low the self-inductance is.  I'm starting to get it, self-inductance is what is killing us; that's the source of Lenz, just like you said.

.6 ohms @ 13.5mH

Those are the values.  Each bobbin has six wingdings on it,  the individual windings are anti-series connected between the two coils, and then their ends are paralleled.  Ultimately we want high inductance, low resistance, this was what Tesla recommended, from the literature we know why.   In my demo I show that contrary to popular belief the acceleration effect can be demonstrated using low inductance low resistance coils operating at low frequency.  The demo also shows that we don't need a magnetic return circuit like some seem hell bent on having  us believe.  In addition to this its clear to see that real current can be produced, we don't have to fight, trying to squeeze out a few milliamps.  Lets get real about this stuff, we want to power our homes but experiment on a level that won't return us a fraction of a fraction of what we put in.

Self inductance isn't killing anything, I maximize the self inductance of systems I build, I do not minimize its effect (self induction) on the system like those who seek to remove Lenz from the equation.  CEMF is an effect, it is the indication that flux has changed, its magnitude tells us everything we need to know about that amplitude and trajectory of which has just changed.


Regards

Quote from: Erfinder on 2015.01.26, 20:06:23
Each bobbin has six wingdings on it,  the individual windings are anti-series connected between the two coils, and then their ends are paralleled.  Ultimately we want high inductance, low resistance, this was what Tesla recommended, from the literature we know why.

Self inductance isn't killing anything, I maximize the self inductance of systems I build, I do not minimize its effect (self induction) on the system like those who seek to remove Lenz from the equation.  CEMF is an effect, it is the indication that flux has changed, its magnitude tells us everything we need to know about that amplitude and trajectory of which has just changed.

Okay, I've missed the target here somehow.  Low resistance I understand, high inductance...  You lost me.  I thought to get high inductance you needed lots of turn, hence small wires which ends up being lots of resistance.  So is that what you did, only you did them in chunks (six) that you paralleled together to bring the resistance back down?

Not real clear by what you mean "anti-series".  Does that mean three windings have one polarity and the other three opposite, then all tied together in a fashion that would appear to be neutral?  Essentially three pairs of bucking coils?

We can take this to another thread if you'd like.  I for one certainly would like to know more.

Nice demo Erfinder,

thanks for sharing!

Are the coil layers cross connected between each other so they play a ping pong game between each other?

Luc

Quote from: Matt Watts on 2015.01.27, 01:24:51
Okay, I've missed the target here somehow.  Low resistance I understand, high inductance...  You lost me.  I thought to get high inductance you needed lots of turn, hence small wires which ends up being lots of resistance.

The target is a large L/R ratio (also known as the L/R time constant).  More turns of thinner wire is better because the inductance (L) increases with the square of the number of turns but resistance (R) increases linearly with the length of the wire and number of turns, so more turns yield a better L/R ratio because a parabola (squaring) grows quicker than a line.

Of course more turns also means more parasitic inter-winding capacitance and sometimes that can be a problem.

The L/R ratio is the target because when this analysis (http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=2684.msg43692#msg43692) is considered, then it immediately becomes apparent that keeping the L/R ratio high, lengthens the L/R time constant in motor circuits and this means that less energy is wasted in the resistance and more energy is transferred to the magnetic field for a longer time ...and more energy is transferred from the magnetic field if you choose to recover it.

I don't want to deviate from this thread but I did experience this speed up and and amp drop about three years ago. Some of my terminology in this vid is wrong but the meters show what I'm talking about. http://youtu.be/ASbXw3RkAHA I was told at the time it was just the current draw masking the core and to move along.

Quote from: gotoluc on 2015.01.27, 01:58:23
Nice demo Erfinder,

thanks for sharing!

Are the coil layers cross connected between each other so they play a ping pong game between each other?

Luc

This is a standard unprofessionally wound multifilar coil.  6 wires per coil, fill the bobbin.  I didn't plan anything, neatness of wire was not taken into consideration, just wind on the wire. The two coils are wound in the same direction.  Connections between coils must be + to + or - to - (ANTI-series) versus + to - (Series).  

If you get an itch and want to attempt a replication, here some advice.  Do not use an induction motor as the prime mover, do not use a commutator based motor as the prime mover.  Your prime mover should be a brushless DC machine driven with a pulse width modulated drive circuit set for the lowest possible duty and frequency, this circuit should be designed so as to allow you to capture the collapsing field if possible.  I don't have a control circuit recommendation, use what you can come up with.  

Ping pong between the coils is an interesting way of describing it.....I wouldn't call it such, I find it better to just say that we are trying to establish those conditions found between windings between the coil and rotor. Bucking is natural, we just don't design our circuits so as to take advantage of it.  

Regards

Quote from: JimBoot on 2015.01.27, 10:10:47
I don't want to deviate from this thread but I did experience this speed up and and amp drop about three years ago. Some of my terminology in this vid is wrong but the meters show what I'm talking about. http://youtu.be/ASbXw3RkAHA I was told at the time it was just the current draw masking the core and to move along.

What you demonstrate is what we find all over the net.  Namely, the effect is associated with a coil of High inductance, and high resistance, the frequency of your setup is also higher, you also have only one coil, it matters little that the coil is bifilar. 

I demonstrate that  with low resistance, low inductance, at low frequency one can generate the same effect, the bifilar aspect is stripped from the individual coil and recombined between a coil pair.  There is much more going on than folks are considering, and its not the job of one or two to spell it all out, you all have to  put your thinking caps.

Thane never demonstrated the effect like I just showed you.  If he did, I never saw that video.  Thane postulates that the coil is behaving like a cap but, in order for it to do this you need high frequency, uh....no, we can make the coil act like a cap (and not just act like a cap, we can convert it into a cap with the proper understanding, such an understanding was patented) at any frequency we want, we just need to rid ourselves of a few firm beliefs which keep us from accomplishing what I am suggesting.  It is not my intention to disrupt this threads direction, however, if its demonstrated that we are spinning our wheels as it were, and things are easier than we have  been led to believe, then why continue along that path?  To me it matters little if you see value in what I am suggesting or not, I'm sharing it and if you see its value you will act, otherwise, you will be left behind. 

It's not that I don't see value in the present discussion, the problem is we know where this leads, and why it hasn't delivered anything of use, review the literature, review the works of those who traveled down this road before us, the list is long!


Regards

Quote from: Erfinder on 2015.01.27, 11:09:45
This is a standard unprofessionally wound multifilar coil.  6 wires per coil, fill the bobbin.  I didn't plan anything, neatness of wire was not taken into consideration, just wind on the wire. The two coils are wound in the same direction.  Connections between coils must be + to + or - to - (ANTI-series) versus + to - (Series).  

If you get an itch and want to attempt a replication, here some advice.  Do not use an induction motor as the prime mover, do not use a commutator based motor as the prime mover.  Your prime mover should be a brushless DC machine driven with a pulse width modulated drive circuit set for the lowest possible duty and frequency, this circuit should be designed so as to allow you to capture the collapsing field if possible.  I don't have a control circuit recommendation, use what you can come up with.  

Ping pong between the coils is an interesting way of describing it.....I wouldn't call it such, I find it better to just say that we are trying to establish those conditions found between windings between the coil and rotor. Bucking is natural, we just don't design our circuits so as to take advantage of it.  

Regards

Dear Erfinder.

If I have understood you correctly, you're coils are wound " hexfilar " ?
I wonder what we would see if we were to wind with a good quality Litz wire, lots of low resistance in parallel, Hmmm!

Just thinking out loud !  :)

Cheers Grum.

Quote from: Grumage on 2015.01.27, 11:44:48
If I have understood you correctly, you're coils are wound " hexfilar " ?
I wonder what we would see if we were to wind with a good quality Litz wire, lots of low resistance in parallel, Hmmm!

If you watch ol' John B wind an SG, you will see many similarities.  What's missing is the sister coil.  Also, he uses steel rod for core material, I didn't see any such core in Erfinder's demo.

I will certainly agree with one thing Erfinder mentioned, we should be much further along than we are.  This doesn't look like rocket science at all; how we skipped right by something so seemingly simple, I do not understand.  I have spools of multi-strand wire that I made myself, used for various testing and for whatever reason never stumbled across this effect.

Quote from: Grumage on 2015.01.27, 11:44:48
Dear Erfinder.

If I have understood you correctly, you're coils are wound " hexfilar " ?
I wonder what we would see if we were to wind with a good quality Litz wire, lots of low resistance in parallel, Hmmm!

Just thinking out loud !  :)

Cheers Grum.

Multiple windings in parallel is how you can reduce the resistance, and maintain the inductance of a single winding.  Not necessarily the smartest thing to do but it is doable. 

What matters to me is that you at least try and understand why the video was shot in the first place.  It was offered as as a rebuttal to a concept which was started by a guy who no longer guides the direction of this concept.  It's being suggested that the coils and magnets should be kept stationary and iron be passed between them, the reason for this I don't have to repeat.  There are enough patents on this concept to keep us busy for years in our attempts at interpreting them.  The results associated with following the logic of the the few who support this stationary magnet and coil concept have been documented.  My argument is that tons of resources are invested in this direction, the only thing that has come out of this effort is an effect which we were already familiar with.  An effect which is for the most part associated with high inductance, high resistance and high frequency.  I demonstrate the opposite, namely I show the effect can be produced using low inductance, low resistance and low frequency.  I show the effect can be demonstrated without all the extra baggage.

You see the video and ask me about the strands, ignoring:

     *  the relation between the coils
     *  the fact that the circuit inductance is low
     *  the fact that the circuit resistance is low
     *  the fact that the circuit operation frequency is low
     *  the lack of a closed magnetic circuit

All of the above are equally important to the means by which the coil resistance is reduced.  What you saw in that video is the past.  This is not where I am now.  This was a moment in time when things started coming together.  Where do you want to end up and why?  I have no idea how the universe works nor its relation to these circuits and in certain circles I may be judged for not having an immediate desire to know this connection. I know or at least hope I know what I want and what I am after, and share this with those who are interested.  I am not asking anyone for anything.  No one can answer a question that originates in you.  I want power in the form of voltage times amperage, and I want it how Nature uses it, without loss, and at the very smallest of expense.  What do you want, from what you present the answer to this question isn't clear to me.  How do you plan on getting what You want?  If you are following the leader, how will you differentiate your own ideas and impressions from his/hers if you aren't asking your own questions and finding your own answers?


Regards

Quote from: Matt Watts on 2015.01.27, 12:15:54
If you watch ol' John B wind an SG, you will see many similarities.  What's missing is the sister coil.  Also, he uses steel rod for core material, I didn't see any such core in Erfinder's demo.

I will certainly agree with one thing Erfinder mentioned, we should be much further along than we are.  This doesn't look like rocket science at all; how we skipped right by something so seemingly simple, I do not understand.  I have spools of multi-strand wire that I made myself, used for various testing and for whatever reason never stumbled across this effect.

The coils in my demo have welding rod cores.  These coils were from an old SG.  I was never a real fan of that concept, but learned a shit load from it.  What I learned early on..(thanks JB) is that the SG was in essence a transformer.  When you see that, it changes just about everything, you start looking at all those other instances when you pulse coils and ask yourself where is the secondary?  This isn't rocket science, and the only reason why folks missed the boat is because they were preoccupied.  The preoccupation is with OU, upholding established concepts and laws, efficiency calculations, and arguments, debates which cover all topics not specifically named. 


Regards

Dear Erfinder.

Quote.

You see the video and ask me about the strands, ignoring:

     *  the relation between the coils
     *  the fact that the circuit inductance is low
     *  the fact that the circuit resistance is low
     *  the fact that the circuit operation frequency is low
     *  the lack of a closed magnetic circuit

Unquote.

Forgive me.

In this " Tool Box " I know as OUR. I consider myself as a Hammer. This tool box also contains some really sharp chisels, however, they don't really work very well as separate entities. What I am saying is that teamwork will reach a common goal.

I am not the really clever one, I'm the guy that can take a two dimensional object on paper to a three dimensional model, a manipulator of material, so to speak, effectively , give me a plan and I will build it. I rely, very heavily on my peers here. I bring an idea to life, that is what I am pretty good at.

Cheers Grum.

Quote from: Grumage on 2015.01.27, 14:33:08
Dear Erfinder.

Quote.

You see the video and ask me about the strands, ignoring:

     *  the relation between the coils
     *  the fact that the circuit inductance is low
     *  the fact that the circuit resistance is low
     *  the fact that the circuit operation frequency is low
     *  the lack of a closed magnetic circuit

Unquote.

Forgive me.

In this " Tool Box " I know as OUR. I consider myself as a Hammer. This tool box also contains some really sharp chisels, however, they don't really work very well as separate entities. What I am saying is that teamwork will reach a common goal.

I am not the really clever one, I'm the guy that can take a two dimensional object on paper to a three dimensional model, a manipulator of material, so to speak, effectively , give me a plan and I will build it. I rely, very heavily on my peers here. I bring an idea to life, that is what I am pretty good at.

Cheers Grum.

Here's the thing, no one here is a tool, figuratively or literally.  I don't see this platform as a place where ideas should be brought to be replicated in sweat shop fashion.  I hope that individuals here are looking for solutions, seeking answers.  Reality is that there is a lot of follow the leader going on.  You are your own leader.  You keep telling yourself and others that you aren't clever, be advised that one day you will start believing it.  You want a plan, formulate one?  I see you building, why are you building what you've built, what's the goal?  How close are you to your goal?  What this guy suggests or that guy says is just that....what that guy suggest and what that guy says.  What matters in the end is what you want and what you are willing to do to get it.  I see folks building what others say, and its funny because it will never lead to what the person building it wants, they know this to, but won't admit it to themselves, nor to the individual whose work they replicate.  If you can't see the goal, YOUR goal from the very beginning chances are, you not doing what you should be doing.


Regards

Sorry!

Quote from: wattsup on 2015.01.27, 18:39:09
@Erfinder

For sure this thread is about the flux deviation which is also in my view the least attractive method to produce output given the magnets are fixed, the coils are fixed, the transfer is via a midway flux deviator that itself creates an added distance between magnets and coils or cores, making direct proximity a less effective tool.

But I also am still very interested in that type of effect because of the simplicity. To push the flux deviation idea one step further would be to simplify the motive force used to turn the flux wheel. My thinking is if the flux wheel was one disk of metal having the cutouts to be between the deviation regions, maybe that disk could turn using the Faraday disk method. This would eliminate any motive drive method from the equation and possibly produce better output results. Also, for the magnets, I think that they should not be too big. Instead of having 8 good diameter magnets, maybe by using 16 (or more) smaller magnets positioned in a zigzag formation will create more movement of the copper atoms as the open window of the flux wheel passes through. These are all more ways of testing.

This was an old demo device.  I only brought it up because the audience was being challenged, it was said that a good demo is better than a ton of words.  I gave a demonstration which showed how the present direction is overrated, receiving more attention than it needs.  I have no interest in the topic being discussed because I have been there, and know it will not give me what I want.  What I want isn't even in what I demonstrated, what I demonstrated is that we are all living a bold face lie.  What I demonstrated is that we can generate an electrical output without the associated mechanical output, the latter being that force which operates in opposition to the prime mover. 

Quote from: wattsup on 2015.01.27, 18:39:09
As you have shown with your build, it touches perfectly on what I previously posted about a magnet passing closely through the copper windings creates cancellation effects from the start, which you have solved by receding the coils or protruding the core to meet the magnet passage. This could be used in the flux deviation methods as well and surely would be advantageous.

Takes a quick mind and eye to catch the obvious.  How many folks totally miss that  O0, you have a keen well trained and focused eye Sir!  There are two forms of induction taking place, one between the core and magnet, and one between the magnet and coil.  The interaction between magnet and core result in you generating an output, soooo.....move the damn coil back...for crying out loud stop being greedy!  The easy fix to "the" problem is the last thing checked by the majority.  I am so glad that there are at least a few who don't raise their hands to be counted.

Quote from: wattsup on 2015.01.27, 18:39:09
Add to that less winds but with multi-strand wire and bingo, I just salivated when I saw those sparks. If you consider also that your build may have room for two more coils, that makes things even more interesting indeed.

Being the looking further junkie that I am, the variables I would have wanted to also see are........

a) If the coils could have slid on the core, while leaving the core in its position, the effect of sliding the coil further then were they are now to see how far you could get from the magnets without losing output.

b) If the coils could have slid on the core, while leaving the core in its position, the effect of sliding the coil closer then were they are now to see how close you could get to the magnets will you lose or gain output. But your thick spacer support at the coil magnet end will prevent that, I know, but had to mention it. Sometime small variable help understand much more of what's going on there.

c) Again using the standard coil topology is great but other coil typologies are possible in many ways. Such as, instead of full winds, putting on pancake coils would also flush the imparted effect away from the cores quickly so they do not create more cancellation.

You don't need my blessing to look into those things.  You see what's needed.  I have no interest in pursuing it further, this device is my dooms day plan B.  Once you see how stupid you were and fix the problem at the source, your horizon broadens and you go after that which you have been putting off owing to your preoccupations.

Quote from: wattsup on 2015.01.27, 18:39:09
I am working on a totally different system, basically two magnets and one straight piece of thick copper wire to prove simple but very direct spin conveyance. I never saw it done before in this way so it will be fun to try. Once it is ready, good or bad, I will post something. hehehe

wattsup

Everyone has their path.  I have the greatest confidence that you will find what you are looking for, and will share what you find along the way.


Regards

Hi Steve,

Thanks for showing the interesting video and although I understand as you wrote that it was an old demo device and it is already the past for you, I have made a drawing of the setup shown in the video, maybe some members here find it useful when attempting a test on it.
Please comment if there is any mistake in the drawing, and will redraw it. I also upload a snapshot from your video and have labeled a few things, to make the drawing visually more understandable, mainly to show the inducing magnets are positioned in the drawing at the top of the coils, above the dots.

I would like to ask whether you considered the effect of the mutual inductance between the two coils (their axis and cores are in a parallel position with each other and close enough to cause mutual induction in each other) if there is any significant interaction at all?  Unfortunately the changing of the distance between the two coils involves using another rotor disc to fit the magnets distance again to the cores distance and I understand this needs patience and machine work again and again.  

I think that from the drawing the answers to your points raised in your Reply #352 above can be seen, namely the low inductance comes from two bucking coils connected in series, this explains the low inductance too,  while the low circuit resistance comes from the parallel connected 6 windings.

What would be a further help from you is to discuss briefly why acceleration happens in your setup? I would be interested to learn about it for sure, what is your take on that, preferably on this forum if you agree.

Thanks,
Gyula

EDIT I deleted a mistake of mine.

Quote from: gyula on 2015.01.27, 21:09:44
Hi Steve,

Thanks for showing the interesting video and although I understand as you wrote that it was an old demo device and it is already the past for you, I have made a drawing of the setup shown in the video, maybe some members here find it useful when attempting a test on it.
Please comment if there is any mistake in the drawing, and will redraw it. I also upload a snapshot from your video and have labeled a few things, to make the drawing visually more understandable, mainly to show the inducing magnets are positioned in the drawing at the top of the coils, above the dots.

Like most your actions are motivated by the best of intentions.  The drawings are a distraction to the subject under discussion, I didn't want to post the video, I did because we were challenged, I responded to the challenge.  If folks are interested in the machine, I highly recommend that they discuss it in an area dedicated to such a discussion, without drawings and snap shots taken from the video.  Images, schematics and the like become the subject instead of instruments used for guiding a discussion, I want no parts of them.  I realize that this may come over harsh, and I do ask forgiveness for that, in my own defense, I have seen many good discussions go to shit as folks argued back and forth over an out of focus photo, or a mistake in a schematic.  You don't need a schematic, you don't need a photo, just an open mind and the means for assembling a test rig.

Quote from: gyula on 2015.01.27, 21:09:44
I would like to ask whether you considered the effect of the mutual inductance between the two coils (their axis and cores are in a parallel position with each other and close enough to cause mutual induction in each other) if there is any significant interaction at all?  Unfortunately the changing of the distance between the two coils involves using another rotor disc to fit the magnets distance again to the cores distance and I understand this needs patience and machine work again and again.  

I have considered the mutual inductance, more important than mutual inductance however is what I refer to as vector addition, the junction between two coils of like polarity form the opposite polarity vector wise.  From this we see two fields in opposition appearing (from the perspective of the vectors) as if they are aiding.  I see more than I care to discuss, those things I saw inspired a different more specific geometry.  I am not classically trained, what I say has meaning to me and the time needed to translate this in to mainstream speak....no one has that kind of time.  

Quote from: gyula on 2015.01.27, 21:09:44
I think that from the drawing the answers to your points raised in your Reply #352 above can be seen, namely the low inductance comes from two bucking coils connected in series, this explains the low inductance too,  it also explains the low RPM acceleration (low coils inductance involves lower frequency),  while the low circuit resistance comes from the parallel connected 6 windings.

The windings of the coils are low inductance, they were placed in "ANTI-Series" so as to: raise the total inductance to that of two windings in series, and maintain that value with all pairs in parallel.  In addition to this, anti-series between two coils wound in the same direction results in bucking fields between the two coils, there is method in the madness.  The acceleration effect cannot be accounted for and or explained by the present understanding of the phenomena.  Technically it should not happen owing to the low inductance and frequency.  An interesting thing  to note is the magnets are inducing directly into the cores and we have the interaction between the field induced in the iron and the field of the magnet, the resulting interaction is dubbed attraction.  The induced in the coil augments one and reduces the strength of the other....please look carefully into this, don't take anything for granted, nor judge me for not crossing a T or dotting an I.

Quote from: gyula on 2015.01.27, 21:09:44
What would be a further help from you is to discuss briefly why acceleration happens in your setup? I would be interested to learn about it for sure, what is your take on that, preferably on this forum if you agree.

Thanks,
Gyula

My job is to demonstrate that the impossible is possible.  I am to do this to the best of my ability, ignoring all laws and acceptable measuring practices while doing so.  I speculate, this makes me unqualified to explain anything.  My theory of operation is my theory of operation, my speculation is strong deluded drink, I don't recommend it, you won't be the same afterwards, and will find it difficult to convert it into mainstream.  I recommend you build the machine if what you have witnessed left an impression on you.   With your build which would not be considered as a replication, you can come to your own conclusions, I am positive you would be a leader in this area, being familiar with the laws has its perks.  If it be your will, I would be more than happy to build and test a model for you.  This way, you are guaranteed to experience what I demonstrated immediately.  You would be supporting my research, something I always welcome, research that all can benefit from.


Regards

Quote from: Erfinder on 2015.01.27, 22:08:47

... The drawings are a distraction to the subject under discussion, I didn't want to post the video, I did because we were challenged, I responded to the challenge.  

Well, if you wish I remove the drawing and the picture, please tell.   

Quote... I have seen many good discussions go to shit as folks argued back and forth over an out of focus photo, or a mistake in a schematic.

While I agree with you that there are forums with heated up discussions, however, in this present case I do not think this is going to happen. And if the drawing is wrong, it can be redrawn, no problem on that. This is a simple drawing for sure, still I had to draw it for a friend because he is "schematic-addicted" to visualize a setup, especially when several coils with phasing are involved and surely there are similar members or lurkers here too...

Thanks for the explanations that you did give, I appreciate them and agree. I knew that two windings of the two coils are always in series and they add their inductances but whether this actually increases the resulting inductance or maybe decreases it depends on the mutual inductance between them.  I will have to check with an L meter this two coils placed near vicinity to each other with the given winding directions how the closeness influences the resultant L inductance (that's why mutual inductance question was posed). I agree that to fully explore the interactions a real build is needed. Thanks for you kind words and offer, will return to it later.

Greetings,
Gyula

Quote from: Erfinder on 2015.01.27, 11:09:45
This is a standard unprofessionally wound multifilar coil.  6 wires per coil, fill the bobbin.  I didn't plan anything, neatness of wire was not taken into consideration, just wind on the wire. The two coils are wound in the same direction.  Connections between coils must be + to + or - to - (ANTI-series) versus + to - (Series).  

If you get an itch and want to attempt a replication, here some advice.  Do not use an induction motor as the prime mover, do not use a commutator based motor as the prime mover.  Your prime mover should be a brushless DC machine driven with a pulse width modulated drive circuit set for the lowest possible duty and frequency, this circuit should be designed so as to allow you to capture the collapsing field if possible.  I don't have a control circuit recommendation, use what you can come up with.  

Ping pong between the coils is an interesting way of describing it.....I wouldn't call it such, I find it better to just say that we are trying to establish those conditions found between windings between the coil and rotor. Bucking is natural, we just don't design our circuits so as to take advantage of it.  

Regards

Thanks for the additional details.

For sure I will replicate this O0
I found some enamel litz wire but the strands are neatly twisted together, do you think it would affect the results?

Regards

Luc

Quote from: gotoluc on 2015.01.28, 07:18:27
Thanks for the additional details.

For sure I will replicate this O0
I found some enamel litz wire but the strands are neatly twisted together, do you think it would affect the results?

Regards

Luc

You aren't going to replicate this, replication requires that I give details.  You are going to try the concept based on what you have seen.  I don't want folks replicating things I present.  Doesn't stop them from trying.  As I have pointed out, my task is to show that the impossible is possible, that a solution to a major issue, drag in generators, is easily reconciled.  My task isn't to walk folks thorough what I do.  If I were to take up that task, there would be no time left for research.

Regarding whether the twisted strands are going to be an issue....I don't know, I haven't, and don't plan on making that comparison.  My windings aren't twisted, no plan, just wound the wire onto the bobbins.


Regards

Quote from: Erfinder on 2015.01.28, 07:56:03
You aren't going to replicate this, replication requires that I give details.  You are going to try the concept based on what you have seen.  I don't want folks replicating things I present.  Doesn't stop them from trying.  As I have pointed out, my task is to show that the impossible is possible, that a solution to a major issue, drag in generators, is easily reconciled.  My task isn't to walk folks thorough what I do.  If I were to take up that task, there would be no time left for research.

Regarding whether the twisted strands are going to be an issue....I don't know, I haven't, and don't plan on making that comparison.  My windings aren't twisted, no plan, just wound the wire onto the bobbins.


Regards

Correct!...  I will try to replicate the effect. Did I not hear you say at the end of your video, "show me this guys"?

btw, I noticed the core diameter is much smaller then the magnets and obliviously the cores stick out of the coils.

Regards

Luc

Quote from: gotoluc on 2015.01.28, 08:36:01
Correct!...  I will try to replicate the effect. Did I not hear you say at the end of your video, "show me this guys"?

btw, I noticed the core diameter is much smaller then the magnets and obliviously the cores stick out of the coils.

Regards

Luc

The comment I made at the end "show me this guys" was directed at the individual who challenged the group, it was not directed at anyone else.  Actually wattsup was challenged, and I just couldn't stand watching paint dry anymore, I also grew tired of the folks showing the effect that Thane demonstrates using high impedance high resistance coils.  Its like no one wants to graduate.  Who cares if you can get the effect with an iron interrupter?  One of the smartest gentlemen on the forum already pointed out that that system is not going to do it, you have to build to some really tight tolerances, and then the damn thing will only operate right when driven right.  Can you say dead end (for the layman)?   It was all just too painful to watch, and I had to say something or I was going to burst.

The core diameter is smaller than the diameter of the magnets, and yes the cores protrude much further out than normal.


Regards

Hi Erfinder,

On your building offer: would like to ask how much it would cost me?  If you think, send a PM to me.

Greetings
Gyula

Quote from: Erfinder on 2015.01.28, 07:56:03
You are going to try the concept based on what you have seen.

Okay, so I took the concept into a transformer (reactor).  I grabbed some Litz wire and wrapped a pair of small toroids, bucking fashion, for the output.  Then I took a single piece of wire and wrapped around both toroids, one continuous loop as the primary.  This primary simulates the rotating magnets where N shows up on one coil, S on the other.  I pumped the input with my audio amp driven from a signal generator.

Can I make sparks?  No sweat.   Can I light an automotive high-beam headlamp?  Yeah, no sweat.  I can blow the sucker up if I want to pretty easy.  PoC done!

Now, if the Litz wire was not acting as a transformer between the tiny wires, say it was replaced with a solid piece of wire, this effect would not appear.  In fact, you would get squat for output.  So I went a little further.  How does acceleration under load look inside of a reactor?  Lets take a look...

What I see, is for any particular input power level I set, there is a specific frequency where I get maximum output power--just call it throughput.  And what does that look like?  Well, as I increase power input, the optimal frequency increases.  So, if I did this in loop mode, I would expect this reactor's frequency to keep driving itself up while increasing power to a point where the core could no longer oscillate any faster, or the wires would smoke, whichever came first.

Quote from: gyula on 2015.01.27, 23:15:38
Well, if you wish I remove the drawing and the picture, please tell.   

To late for that now....80 views and counting.......

Quote from: gyula on 2015.01.27, 23:15:38
While I agree with you that there are forums with heated up discussions, however, in this present case I do not think this is going to happen. And if the drawing is wrong, it can be redrawn, no problem on that. This is a simple drawing for sure, still I had to draw it for a friend because he is "schematic-addicted" to visualize a setup, especially when several coils with phasing are involved and surely there are similar members or lurkers here too...

You drawing for someone else means you are doing their work for them.  Not wise, even if it is done with the best intentions.  If they want to understand something they should put forth the necessary effort, you did!  

Quote from: gyula on 2015.01.27, 23:15:38
Thanks for the explanations that you did give, I appreciate them and agree. I knew that two windings of the two coils are always in series and they add their inductances but whether this actually increases the resulting inductance or maybe decreases it depends on the mutual inductance between them.  I will have to check with an L meter this two coils placed near vicinity to each other with the given winding directions how the closeness influences the resultant L inductance (that's why mutual inductance question was posed). I agree that to fully explore the interactions a real build is needed. Thanks for you kind words and offer, will return to it later.

Greetings,
Gyula

You have to assume that I have done some measurements, and I have, I wouldn't have indicated values if I hadn't.  I know what I am doing, (I think) to some it may not sound like I do because I mix a little of this with that, resulting in something that comes over a little confused sounding, don't be misled by the confused tone.  You address the mutual inductance again after asking me what I was doing, and even after receiving my answer you do not acknowledge what I specifically said I observe between coils in opposition.....interesting...its almost as if it doesn't matter.  

I appreciate your interest in the demonstration and look forward to seeing what you come up with in the future.


Regards

Hi Erfinder. I really enjoyed the video and learned a few things thanks. Just for the record I posted my vid of the effect simply to show it from 3 years ago. You've given me some ideas for my next build. I'm not that interested in "fighting lenz" or anything like that. As far as I'm concerned Lenz is beat in spinning iron rather than magnets. "All" that remains is the right geometry, right coils for max pu and efficient prime mover . Lenz is none of my concern nor is speeding up under load. BTW I thought you were an really old bloke :)

Quote from: Matt Watts on 2015.01.28, 08:56:09
Okay, so I took the concept into a transformer (reactor).  I grabbed some Litz wire and wrapped a pair of small toroids, bucking fashion, for the output.  Then I took a single piece of wire and wrapped around both toroids, one continuous loop as the primary.  This primary simulates the rotating magnets where N shows up on coil, S on the other.  I pumped the input with my audio amp driven from a signal generator.

Can I make sparks?  No sweat.   Can I light an automotive high-beam headlamp?  Yeah, no sweat.  I can blow the sucker up if I want to pretty easy.  PoC done!

Now, if the Litz wire was not acting as a transformer between the tiny wires, say it was replaced with a solid piece of wire, this effect would not appear.  So I went a little further.  How does acceleration under load look inside of a reactor?  Lets take a look...

What I see, is for any particular power level I set, there is a specific frequency where I get maximum power.  And what does that look like?  Well, as I increase power input, the optimal frequency increases.  So, if I did this in loop mode, I would expect this reactor's frequency to keep driving itself up while increasing power to a point where the core could no longer oscillate any faster, or the wires would smoke, whichever came first.

I love the term REACTOR, I remember when I first started using it as it related to a concept I was working out.  In the end what I learned is that impedance can be used in a way that I have never seen before.  My ignorance being the only thing that allowed me to see this and seek to find a way of controlling it.  

Imagine being able to switch hundreds of amps instantly, and to do this without generating dangerous transients situations either in current or voltage or both, this is what a proper reactor facilitates.  It is for lack of a better way of putting it, is a true self regulating variable impedance, neither inductive nor capacitive, more a perfect embodiment of both. The self regulating aspect is made possible by recognizing that the fundamental as I call it serves as a carrier wave.  This carrier wave is modulated via a DC pulse, the DC pulse introduces an almost infinite range of harmonically related sine functions into the carrier, the coil demodulates the input signal.  Work as it is called in this system is carried out on one or more of the higher harmonics superimposed on the fundamental.  The reactor can relate to and operate on many frequencies at the same time.  The process for this begins when the parallel resonant condition is established at a harmonic just outside of the fundamental.  Parallel resonance keeps the reactor isolated from the supply, supply is directly associated with the fundamental, and indirectly with all other operating frequencies.   Do not underrate the voltage value of this cap bank.  Series resonance is a simulated condition, it is to be understood that here Ferroresonance is equivalent to series resonance, as in transformers this condition by definition destroys a transformers ability to generate a CEMF.  The combination of the two, the prior (parallel LC resonance) in association with the change in circuit inductance with increasing frequency, and the latter (ferroresonance) constitute a hybrid form of resonance which is neither parallel or series in the true sense, this relation facilitates the transitioning from one frequency to to the next within the infinite series of superimposed sine functions.  I call it Infinite Harmonic Resonant Self-Oscillation.  Remember...its speculation.....speculation is good..........unfortunately this isn't the place for such an exchange.

Hope that sheds some light on how I see acceleration under load inside "MY" reactor.


Regards

Quote from: JimBoot on 2015.01.28, 09:30:41
Hi Erfinder. I really enjoyed the video and learned a few things thanks. Just for the record I posted my vid of the effect simply to show it from 3 years ago. You've given me some ideas for my next build. I'm not that interested in "fighting lenz" or anything like that. As far as I'm concerned Lenz is beat in spinning iron rather than magnets. "All" that remains is the right geometry, right coils for max pu and efficient prime mover . Lenz is none of my concern nor is speeding up under load. BTW I thought you were an really old bloke :)

There is no need to fight against Lenz, there never was, and never will be. Now when you say that Lenz is beat, I feel like you really don't get what I tried to share, but I could be reading to deep into what you are saying.  I demonstrated that we don't need to reinvent the wheel, if the purpose of fixing the magnets and coils is to get around the effects associated with CEMF, and it has been demonstrated that this isn't necessary, then why continue to support the latter?  I don't follow the logic.  Another thing that is totally missed is that it just maybe possible that the substance as I call it moving in the polarized material is moving so fast that it appears static to us.  All I can say for certain is that when I move two of these polarized bodies with relation to one another there are forces which manifest which leads me to conclude that gyroscopic forces are at work, if this line of thinking be one which could lead to something fruitful, then it makes sense to me to associate this gyroscopic force with gyroscopic force, that is to say..... spin the damn things.  But that's me....to each his own. 

You can move your magnets like they taught you in school or YouTube.  Look back in history, some complained before Lenz, some didn't, go figure.


Regards

Quote from: Erfinder on 2015.01.28, 10:06:37
There is no need to fight against Lenz, there never was, and never will be. Now when you say that Lenz is beat, I feel like you really don't get what I tried to share, but I could be reading to deep into what you are saying.  I demonstrated that we don't need to reinvent the wheel, if the purpose of fixing the magnets and coils is to get around the effects associated with CEMF, and it has been demonstrated that this isn't necessary, then why continue to support the latter?  I


Regards

Because I have a demonstration of a working self runner with rotating iron

Quote from: JimBoot on 2015.01.28, 20:13:05
Because I have a demonstration of a working self runner with rotating iron

Dear Jim.

ARE YOU KIDDING ??  :D

Cheers Grum.

SORRY! When I say I - I mean Syairs demo

Quote from: JimBoot on 2015.01.28, 20:50:33
SORRY! When I say I - I mean Syairs demo

JimBoot mate,

I have known Erfinder in energy research for close to 10 years and would trust his advice any day before trusting a video demo of an unknown individual.
Erfinder has taken the time to share some of his past research that demonstrates something we are all seeking. Matt has made a quick proof of concept of Erfinders device and reports positive results. So why do we need to re-invent the wheel (spinning iron with fixed magnets) to get the same results?

Let us be careful with non proven devices like Syairs demo.

Kind regards

Luc

Quote from: gotoluc on 2015.01.28, 22:04:59
JimBoot mate,

I have known Erfinder in energy research for close to 10 years and would trust his advice any day before trusting a video demo of an unknown individual.
Erfinder has taken the time to share some of his past research that demonstrates something we are all seeking. Matt has made a quick proof of concept of Erfinders device and reports positive results. So why do we need to re-invent the wheel (spinning iron with fixed magnets) to get the same results?

Let us be careful with non proven devices like Syairs demo.

Kind regards

Luc

With all due respect that is your reality not mine. I really enjoy reading erfinder and watching his video. I don't know him but he seems like a smart honest bloke. Syair has shown a video with plans of a build and from what I can see has not held anything back. As EF has pointed out himself there is a lot we do not know about his setup.

Quote from: JimBoot on 2015.01.28, 22:35:05
With all due respect that is your reality not mine. I really enjoy reading erfinder and watching his video. I don't know him but he seems like a smart honest bloke. Syair has shown a video with plans of a build and from what I can see has not held anything back. As EF has pointed out himself there is a lot we do not know about his setup.

I guess I'll see you at the finish line.

For your entertainment and or consideration........

http://jnaudin.free.fr/dlenz/indexen.htm


Regards

Calling this a delayed lenz effect is not an accurate description.
This is more trying to delay the lorentz force,not the lenz law.
Lenz's law indicates the direction of the induced current,while the lorentz force law is tied in with Faraday's law of induction. Lorentz force is the magnetic force that acts on a wire carrying current within a magnetic field.

In knowing this,what you guys are trying to do,is delay an effect that needs to exist before current can flow. A magnetic field travels at the speed of light(so it is believed),so in knowing this,you may achieve a picosecond delay if your lucky.

Quote from: TinMan on 2015.01.30, 12:48:25
Calling this a delayed lenz effect is not an accurate description.
This is more trying to delay the lorentz force,not the lenz law.
Lenz's law indicates the direction of the induced current,while the lorentz force law is tied in with Faraday's law of induction. Lorentz force is the magnetic force that acts on a wire carrying current within a magnetic field.

In knowing this,what you guys are trying to do,is delay an effect that needs to exist before current can flow. A magnetic field travels at the speed of light(so it is believed),so in knowing this,you may achieve a picosecond delay if your lucky.

This isn't guilt by association.  My posting a link doesn't imply that I support whats being said about the phenomena, and for the record, delayed Lenz is a stupid idea, but that's my opinion, its not shared by the majority.  Results are what I care about, and this guy is demonstrating an "effect" which should have all who are interested in rotating machines attention.  I find that folks are too busy with the theory and not busy enough with mastering the effect itself. 


Regards

Dear Erfinder.

In your post above you make reference to this site. http://jnaudin.free.fr/dlenz/indexen.htm

All I see is a mish mash of topics, admittedly, similar theme. Is there a specific area you are suggesting we should pay closer attention to ?

Cheers Grum.

Quote from: Grumage on 2015.01.30, 13:07:57
Dear Erfinder.

In your post above you make reference to this site. http://jnaudin.free.fr/dlenz/indexen.htm

All I see is a mish mash of topics, admittedly, similar theme. Is there a specific area you are suggesting we should pay closer attention to ?

Cheers Grum.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?x-yt-ts=1422579428&x-yt-cl=85114404&v=YUoyuiQTrRA#t=17

Regards

0.4 Watts lower at optimum distance compared with the "No load" where I'm assuming (but could be wrong) the coil and metal bar is completely removed.

Quote from: Matt Watts on 2015.01.31, 02:17:29
0.4 Watts lower at optimum distance compared with the "No load" where I'm assuming (but could be wrong) the coil and metal bar is completely removed.

You can look at this from any angle that you like.  The purpose of my posting a link to that guys information was to give those who would rather play the numbers game something to play with, and to give those who require a scientific foundation something to build on.  I do not support his numbers, nor his idea.  I do not support the concept of Delayed Lenz, I am only interested in the effect, and geometry needed to bring about that effect.  I showed you the same.


Regards

Picked up a washing machine today for a few cents from the scap guy. Got a great stator motor as well as a pump :) question. As I need my mags stationery I need to remove them from the rotor. They're ceramics, anyone got some cool way of removing them from a rotor without damaging them? Obviously not keen on using heat. Would a  :strong solvent do the trick?

Quote from: Mr. Caribbean on 2015.02.01, 03:00:49
Hi everyone,

Here's an update on the T1000 design...

...it is the right link so...?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DtWMullF4O0

I've always post the info in the comment section of my videos but from now on i'll copy & paste it here as well...

Just another update on this Flux Gate Generator setup using the design from T-1000...^^
Now i'm using a 8 pole rotor but with ferrite bars instead of the half circle/sphere iron disks...;-)
Numbers,
Input is 23Vdc @ <75ma...sweet...;-)
Open coils = 1563 rpm...coool...
Coil & leds = 1556 rpm...pretty good...not bad at all...^^
Coil shorted = 1556 rpm...nice...
Output is nice and stable so no flickering at them leds...
Very little cogging, just a tiny winy bit...lol

Coils in the continuously shorted style...see professional diagram of it in the video...LOL...haha
Continuously shorting = 1563 rpm...o.O...very nice indeed...^^
Leds load = 1559 rpm...^^
Only 4 rpm drop...:DDD
The leds output may not be that much BUT neither is my input...;-)

I will use that b-emf in the near future configurations to light up a 230vac 1watt led lamp and use all of the output back to the source just for the fun of it...;-)
Don't know if the b-emf is enough to light up the lamp but it sure looks like it is...lol

Ah,theres the video ;D
Cant even see the rotor spinning it's that smooth O0
I see you havent lost your touch bro-nice setup there for sure.

Good to see you here @mcr - I've had a BIG decrease in input cost by having my axle vertical has halved the power required for same speeds.

Sorry!

Wattsup,

I enjoy reading your posts, they are always packed with lots of thought provoking information.  My thing is, I want that cancellation that's going on, its happening for a reason, and that reason is the reason why I am still playing with coils.  I am not interested in OU, I want more than that. 

My demonstration, acceleration under load using low inductance, low resistance coils operating at low frequency, has an even older beginning.  The original concept was embodied in a motor, but as we know, motors and generators are joined at the hip, when you understand one you know how the principles can be applied to the other.  Before there was this ignorant concept of delayed Lenz which seems to have just appeared out of nowhere there was a real concept.  The concept of producing magnetic phase difference, patented in 1894 by the man who kick started the 21st century.  You all know him as Mr. Niagara Falls, whenever hes in my neck of the woods I call him Nicky, all his friends call him Nicky.  Ladies and gentlemen of OUR, give a warm round of applause for the one the only, Nikola Tesla!


Regards

Quote from: Mr. Caribbean on 2015.02.01, 03:00:49
Hi everyone,

Here's an update on the T1000 design...

...it is the right link so...?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DtWMullF4O0

Thanks for the build :)

This is predicted behavior when you lessen losses in rotor cores.
The second step can be with overcoming sticky point with magnets/rotor blades ratio (aka Muller dynamo approach) and finding material for rotor cores which will allow maximum transfer of magnetic field to the coils without increasing much of Eddy currents in losses... This also will involve on lowering distance between coils and magnets due very short range of strong magnetic field.

Cheers!

There is plenty of space to think about... :)

Also my design function in same wasy like magnetic amplifiers do - http://sparkbangbuzz.com/mag-amp/mag-amp.htm

(http://sparkbangbuzz.com/mag-amp/mag-amp-magnets-55.gif)

When the rotor core get between two magnets behaves exactly like in that image and when it move away or approach magnet it just transfer magnetic field. And as you see, it does not require much energy to do that switching at all.. :)

Cheers!

Quote from: T-1000 on 2015.02.01, 21:29:47
There is plenty of space to think about... :)

Also my design function in same wasy like magnetic amplifiers do - http://sparkbangbuzz.com/mag-amp/mag-amp.htm

(http://sparkbangbuzz.com/mag-amp/mag-amp-magnets-55.gif)

When the rotor core get between two magnets behaves exactly like in that image and when it move away or approach magnet it just transfer magnetic field. And as you see, it does not require much energy to do that switching at all.. :)

Cheers!

You can't be serious with this latest claim.......

I don't agree with this assessment that your machine operates like a magnetic amplifier.  From your demonstrations its clear to those who care to look that your circuit impedance changes from what could be consider as one parallel resonant frequency, to a higher parallel resonant frequency.  The result of which is that the higher induced potentials circulating in this "LC" at the newly established resonant frequency forces your consumption to drop, and fixes your rpm to that frequency, typical parallel resonant behavior, nothing to be proud of because its text book.  

A magnetic amplifier facilitates those conditions experienced during series LC resonance.  If your machine were truly behaving as a mag amplifier, the result would be that your machines consumption would increase, with the rpm, rpm would continue to increase, and consumption would continue to increase, frequency for frequency, simulating a series resonance at every frequency change.  I know this because all of my machines are built around the concept of controlled saturation, my machines are Magnetic Amplifiers.

I am sure a researcher such as yourself is familiar with the Amplidyne.  The Amplidyne is an electromechanical amplifier invented by Erst Alexanderson, the godfather of Magnetic Amplifier technology as we know it today.  Brushless DC motors and generators don't have wire wound armatures and the quadrature brush set, necessary attributes if the device is to be used as Amplidyne.  Here the magnetic amplifier serves as a go between, it allows one skilled in the art to establish those relations found in the Amplidyne between the armature and brush inductively.   In a pulsed DC system, a properly configured transformer has additional functions, it is not limited to its step up step down function.  Its not wise to say your device operates like something that it is not.  Here are two old images of a machine where a magnetic amplifier concept is being tested and advanced.


Regards

@wattsup

QuoteI could have posted this in any thread open on the forum and it will be on topic for all of them. At a certain point in any R&D efforts, you have to stop, look at what you have been doing, look at the results of those efforts, then propose changes in the general modus operandi to continue the R&D trying to hone in on the slightest deviations that change effects.

I would agree and the Engineer in me keeps telling me to do the same thing over and over with little consideration. So I started thinking more like an artist, I have a couple glasses of merlot, crank some Jimi Hendrix All along the watchtower and build stuff...it's my thing. I understand we feel compelled to follow because we seem to lack direction however intuitively I think we know the results.


I like your posts because right or wrong they offer another perspective in a comprehensive way and the devil is always in the details.

AC

Quote from: Erfinder on 2015.02.02, 08:55:50
You can't be serious with this latest claim.......

What difference do you see between saturated core when it is part of transformer and when it physically moves in between two strong magnets and get saturated there?
I see none except it is on different applications. The secondary/generator coil still get same change in inductivity due changed core parameters in both cases.
So the rest is up to you to thinking if output coil is behaving same or not.
Also for the transformer case the amount of current is changing with core saturation while with permanent magnets we do not care much due their constant magnetic field strength output... ;)

Sorry!

@wattsup

I don't know exactly what Erfinder is doing however I know there are very many ways to do what he is doing. However I would have to get Erfinder's permission to tell everyone how I would do it as well as the implications. I would hate to spoil the surprise if Erfinder ever decided to disclosed it.

AC

Quote from: Allcanadian on 2015.02.03, 00:54:39
@wattsup

I don't know exactly what Erfinder is doing however I know there are very many ways to do what he is doing. However I would have to get Erfinder's permission to tell everyone how I would do it as well as the implications. I would hate to spoil the surprise if Erfinder ever decided to disclosed it.

AC

AC,

We have been here before......This time around you ask for permission which is interesting.  I am a tad bit confused, first you say you don't know exactly what I'm doing, I can agree with that, however, your follow up statement that there are many ways of doing it after having stated that you don't know what it is that I'm doing is kinda odd.

Please by all means inform the good folks here of what you "think"  I am doing and how "you" would go about doing it, and the implications of doing it your way.  I am curious about this surprise you hate to spoil.  It is my sincerest hope AC that you don't just throw a few lines of well arranged text, which reads as if it were prepared by one of the wisest philosophers of our time.  I hope you put your best foot forward as I am trying to do, and provide the good folks here with a demonstration.  If you are unable or unwilling to give a demonstration, then I don't see the point in you sharing your view, that being said...please show your work, I recommend starting a new thread if you do, and we can take this discussion there.  Please remember, I have little or no interest in an assessment which has no supporting demo.



Regards

Quote from: Mr. Caribbean on 2015.02.03, 07:24:33
Here's a pic on how i have the T1000 Flux Gate Design... ;D
White are the coil cores...black are the half iron disks...red & blue magnets ofcourse...you are looking at it from above... ;)
Hope i get this pic posting right... C.C

With even/even arrangement the Lorenz force is causing trouble. If you treat rotor cores as magnets with  repulsion on approach and attraction on leave over stationary magnets the even/odd configuration becomes obvious... ;)
That also solve problem with Eddy currents slowing down rotor due geometry of arrangements.

Cheers!

Quote from: Mr. Caribbean on 2015.02.03, 07:24:33
Here's a pic on how i have the T1000 Flux Gate Design... ;D
White are the coil cores...black are the half iron disks...red & blue magnets ofcourse...you are looking at it from above... ;)
Hope i get this pic posting right... C.C

For his design this configuration gives me almost zero cogging... O0...but eddy is killing it at higher rpm...lol
Video here,

Cheers
p.s....how come my pic is sooo large on here...lol

Hey Vlad do you have cores in your coils? What are your rotor irons made of? I'm not seeing any noticeable eddy current probs which is why I ask. I'm using silicon steel in the core and the rotor.

 :-[

Hi everyone,

I've been busy with another project for the past 3 weeks and didn't have the time to complete one of my last experiment to confirm if this effect has any value.
So before closing the book on this one, since my previous version was not showing a good results and was also a different design, I wanted to build a single coil version of Dragon's version (Energetic Forum user) since he claimed to have some good results.

Even with these changes, my results are not positive, however, I made a video of it anyways so all can see.

From all the replication attempts that I've seen, researchers are not doing power calculations (watts in and watts out), so as far as I'm concerned they won't see the reality until they do.

Link to video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O0souZVPKw8

I'm moving on to testing Erfinder's multi strand bucking coils.

Luc

Sorry!

Quote from: wattsup on 2015.02.04, 23:15:16
@MC

Man oh man, you are on a roll, but I think you (and others) need to understand what change means for a coil.

The shield rotors you presently have as half circles are not enough to create any major change if looked at by the coils.

See in the below modification of your drawing, those yellows sections are areas between two magnet where there is no coil so this is a waste. Then look at all the coils that are exposed to the magnets because those shields are not there. That is not change man.

Also, because your magnets are N-S and because the coils are placed between every second NS pair, your are actually creating more neutral under the coils then anything else. It does not matter how many shields you use, those individual shields will not create the changes you are imagining they will do for the coils.

With all due respect to @T-1000 and others, I know playing with toys is so much fun but there comes a time when reality needs to be accessed for what it really is.

I see there is misunderstanding what passing cores should do by design so perhaps some clarification will help. The rotor cores have three functions in my design:
1) transfer magnetic field from each magnet into coil
2) make neutral zone between two magnets when coil has reached maximum potential by induction so the coils attractive magnetic force from collapsing induced field will be on 90 degrees to the rotor movement
3) assist induction when leaving neutral zone for the second half of cycle which is opposite and that will create magnetic repelling force towards rotor movement from coil instead of attraction when leaving coil zone. This completes induction cycle.

For all logic please see debug my attached drawing step by step and see how magnetic field forces from magnets and coil will get aligned for each period of time when core is moving from the left to right:

Quote from: gotoluc on 2015.02.04, 22:38:24
Hi everyone,

From all the replication attempts that I've seen, researchers are not doing power calculations (watts in and watts out), so as far as I'm concerned they won't see the reality until they do.


Luc

Just because you haven't seen it on Youtube doesn't mean they haven't been done. Thank you for your concern

I will be sharing my replication attempt of Erfinder's multi strand bucking gen coils at this topic: http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=2782.0

Thanks for video Vladimir,

You can add many magnets/disks/coils in series as you wish, when there is no cogging it can be multiplied.
Also to remove cogging even more you might tweak the driving part which is single coil attracted to the magnets and that can be balanced as well.. :)
When you efficiently rectify generator coils output and can get more that 3 watts output your drive circuit will be ready for self loop. And also BEMF can be recovered as well if you charge series of capacitors then get energy back from their middle junction (see how B_e_d_i_n_i style circuits are doing that).

Cheers!

Quote from: Mr. Caribbean on 2015.02.11, 11:53:23
MDF will suck up water like a sponge and it did...

Yup.  I'd like to know with what can MDF be impregnated so it does not soak up water like that ?

Quote from: verpies on 2015.02.11, 14:35:43
Yup.  I'd like to know with what can MDF be impregnated so it does not soak up water like that ?

Dear Verpies.

The dreaded MDF ! I hate the stuff. It doesn't even burn well .  :)

My solution has been a two coat scenario, first 50/50 mix of a quality Yacht varnish with suitable thinners and then a finish coat of 100% varnish.

MDF does have it's uses as it is easy to machine with sharp tooling and sands into almost any desired shape. I used to use it for pattern making. Those patterns were then cast into Aluminium masters. But that's another story!!

Cheers Grum.

Have a look at this guys.  It's from a wind generator.  Pay particular attention to the intermediate "interrupters" and the hub offsets where the permanent magnets are.  Quite interesting if I do say so.

Hi guys,

The summer is near already, should you renew experiments on magnetic switching? Been a while since last results...

--Moved to http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=2358.msg51836#msg51836