PopularFX
Home Help Search Login Register
Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.
2021-08-02, 22:32:12
News: Forum TIP:
The SHOUT BOX deletes messages after 3 hours. It is NOT meant to have lengthy conversations in. Use the Chat feature instead.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Author Topic: Daniel McFarland Cook Generator  (Read 190714 times)

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3842


Buy me some coffee
If theres a patent for a Device and at the end of the patent it lists 2 witnesses what did they witness, the signing of the patent or did they witness the device working.

I am talking about the Daniel Mcfarland patent.
http://www.google.com/patents?id=fE5rAAAAEBAJ&pg=PA1&source=gbs_selected_pages&cad=1#v=onepage&q&f=false

Witnesses were A.J.Mack & J.W.Jenner What have they witnessed ?

I find this device very interesting, Cook was a mad inventor, he made his money making a Sugar refiningtable, he died poor having put his fortune into an air ship.

more importantly the patent pre dates most electrical & electronic understanding, something happened in theory after the early 1900's which prohibits our thinking from being able to build a working OU device.

I feel all the answers are in the Cook device.
The way he connects the 2 sets of solenoid coils up is almost laughable, interestingly this was also the same comment when someone trained in the art watched Hendershot wire his device, chances are that if we knew how SM wired his TPU then we would probably say he was mad for wiring it the way he did as well, my point is, our electronic logic is stopping us from winding coils or connecting them in a fashion to produce OU because the way they need to be made and wired is so stupid we would never even bother trying.

Remember what SM said about it being right under our noses  O0

I am looking at the Daniel Cook coils and think to myself you idiot why would you wire a primary to a secondary and the the other primary to the other secondary and expect it to work, our training tells us this would never work, and on this basis i will come forward to say, this is the exact answer to OU, here lies in some way, a way to beat Lenzes law.

There are some interesting features of many of these OU devices they seem to use magnets and wire.
In the Cook device we know he uses large amounts of wire for the secondary, the thinner and longer the better, so again it goes against logic, we have large resistive losses here, we have 2 huge iron rods, guess what the Cook device sounds exactly like the Tesla Car generator, there are the 2 iron rods again.

There are similarties with the TPU and the Hendershot devices as well, and also as Poynt pointed out to me, Spherics used coils with large amounts of copper wire as well.

Thane used large amounts of copper wire along with the work Deepcut is doing on the Acceleration under load motor, interestingly this also works with transformers, no OU yet with this but it's an intersting effect most over look which only gives results with high resistance coils.

Also interestingly nearly all of these devices blame the magnetic earths field for producing the excess energy, there are more than one device where it has been stated that enormous amounts of energy can be harnessed from the earths magnetic field, yet all we can do is get a compass to align.

Well one thing i will say is that i have personally witnessed a valve filament be tugged at power on, and according to SM the earths field is responsible, there's no doubt it's quiet a tug.

Everyone knows that we cannot extract energy from the earths mag field so all these people with working devices are crazy because our knowledge makes us wiser and tells us it wont work.

I cant but help think that Cook in 1871 can do it even before Tesla invented AC electricity.

The way i see it is that our knowledge is stopping us from achieving our ultimate goal, we will never find OU until we study things that we find stupid.  >:(
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3842


Buy me some coffee
The Cook device is the only device we have all the information on.
All replications so far have not realized the significance of an enormously long thin secondary  O0

Oh and also Cook used a high resistance in series to allow the coils to run at low potential, allowing them to tick over once intially started, Cook was pretty clever he had to mention the word battery to get the device started, he worded this very carefully to confuse the patent office and to get the device through the patent process, the simple fact he used a resistance to idle the device tells us it really was a free energy machine, if it relied on batteries all the time, then you would simply disconnect the battery LOL and reconnect when you wanted the device to run, this is not the case.
Funny enough Hendershot also used a high resistance in series with his windings, this it would appear to be a idle secondary circuit, when switched off, this resistance would allow just enough idle current to keep the device in operational condition, so that when the main switch was on the device would instantly operate. He was a lot more clever than Cook   ;)

One other thing about the Cook coils, the secondary coil has no wires at the end, the primary has 2 copper shorted turns at each end which have little taps on for connections, but if you look at these copper rings and the shading, you will also see copper rings on the inside these compress against the secondary coil for connection, this is why there are 2 secondary wires that appear to connect only to the primary as well.

So to recap, the primary has a shorted copper ring at each and, and also does the secondary, the secondary winding itself has no loose wire ends as such, isn't that interesting, because with each secondary we have excess wire which is thin and long, and not terminated, these could well be built in helical antennas or maybe used for capactive tuning, Tesla preferred to use a straight antenna instead, but then he had his coils mounted in a sealed box so no one could see how simple the device was.
You will also see that these helical coils are only at one end.

Happy thinking  O0
   

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3480
tExB=qr
These two links are interesting but unsuccessful, but he might have done something incorrectly.
http://my.voyager.net/~jrrandall/CookCoil.htm

and an update on the above:
http://my.voyager.net/~jrrandall/CookUpDate.htm

Daniel's starting explanaiton from the patent:
The mode of producing or starting the action in the helices consists in the use of a steel or electromagnet, or a helix, around one of the helices, and causing a secondary current in the enclosed helix by means of a battery current in the outer one; the action then in either the simple or compound helices increases in quantity to the maximum capacity of the wires to conduct with the existing tension of the current. If, now, the circuit is broken the current instantly ceases, and can only be restored by the same means that it was first produced; hence to allow the use of the main circuit for common purposes I introduce a rheostat or resistance of any kind into the circuit, so that a small portion of the current only will flow along the resistance, by which means the action in the helices is feebly maintained when the main circuit is broken, and instantly restored when it is closed to its full force. By this means the action becomes in effect the same as the common battery currents, and may be used for similar purposes. For the purpose of preventing the heating of the helices caused by the intensity of the action, and to prevent circulation of the initial secondary currents in the main circuit, a rheostat of any convenient form may be made to constitute a part of the main circuit D. The alternate changes of the iron cores or magnets may be used for producing electro-magnetic motion, or motion to a wheel of any suitable device.
   

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3480
tExB=qr
This excerpt from the patent is interesting:

A ribbon spiral may be substituted for the secondary helix, say of three, six, twelve, or twenty-four inches in width and of any convenient length, but always of sufficient length to raise the tension of the terminal current to a degree necessary to reproduce itself by its action on the primary helix. In the use of compound helices it is important that the secondary coil should be wound on in the same direction as the primary coil, and that the poles or wires should be connected to the opposite poles of the primary coil B.
   

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3480
tExB=qr
Cook's patent for improvements in galvanic batteries:

http://www.google.com/patents/US110206

   

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3480
tExB=qr
   

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2956
Quote from: Peterae
If there's a patent for a Device and at the end of the
patent it lists 2 witnesses what did they witness,
the signing of the patent or did they witness the
device working.

Witness to Signature is a legal process which may
still be used today.  This is the most common meaning
of the two witness signatures following the signature
of the claimant.

Quote from: The Free Dictionary
...
b. One who is called on to be present at a transaction
in order to attest to what takes place.
c. One who signs one's name to a document for the
purpose of attesting to its authenticity.



---------------------------
For there is nothing hidden that will not be disclosed, and nothing concealed that will not be known or brought out into the open.
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1935
@Grumpy
Thanks for the links, there was one that I have never read before.
You know I have read this patent 20 or more times and I still like it and I still learn something new every time I read it. It like it because there is nothing there, it is simply two transformers which have been cross wired as anyone can plainly see. However intuitively we know this is not true, intuitively we know this is not the case because of the way the author describes the device and it's actions. Intuitively we know these are the words of a person who has spent a great deal of time and effort perfecting this device and refining it's actions to the point where it verges on a form of art.

I like this device because it takes the term expertise to a new level, imagine the skill required to create a circuit which self-oscillates, which self-resonates without switching of any kind relying solely on the properties of the components and the qualities of the currents within it. Personally I know of no expert who has this level of understanding let alone the skills required to make it a reality and from some of the related experiments I have done this is very much harder than it appears.

As well there is the language barrier and the term "current" or "currents" was used in a general sense to describe many things at the time of this patent. It should also be noted that he refers to the coil B as the primary which we intuitively see as the secondary and the secondary C which we see as the primary of fewer and heavier turns. He also makes reference to a main circuit D which is not present in the patent and which I have yet to see.

AC


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

“Progress is impossible without change, and those who cannot change their minds cannot change anything.” George Bernard Shaw
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3842


Buy me some coffee
Good find Grumpy i was not aware of the battery patent.

The ribbon spiral is interesting, especially if your iron rods are 24 inches long and you wind your ribbon using 24 inch wide copper ribbon  O0

Yeah i had seen that replication, his primary wire does not look thick enough, it would appear it is important to minimize it's resistance, it also looks like he connects at the end of the secondaries and does not place a shorting ring.

Cheers Dumped, yes i guess that's what it probably means but was not sure if the device could be witnessed as working, wishful thinking on my part  C.C
   
Group: Elite
Hero Member
******

Posts: 3541
It's turtles all the way down
When I look at the patent drawings of the Cook device, I interpret compound wound coils to have a different meaning. In other words, the wire is first wound on a small diameter former to create the first helix, then this is first helix is wound around the iron rods to produce the second helix and what looks similar to the patent drawing. This is my interpretation of "compound wound".

He states "My invention relates to the combination of two or more simple or compound helices" etc.

Years ago I considered this and wound some coils in this manner. I did not experiment with large iron cores, perhaps this is necessary. I did not have any material on hand to make the iron cores 2 to 3 inches in diameter and 2, 3 or 6 feet in length. Interesting that he states that using a bundle of fine iron wires is much better than a solid bar. It seems eddy current losses were possibly a factor, but this would imply a frequency of oscillation, not DC

To my knowledge, no one else has approached it from this observation. This is an unusual winding technique and should be further explored as the fields are twisted in an interesting way. I find this patent intriguing and hope to give a better try at replication.

Maybe soft steel hanger wire straightened and packed into a tube would work as the core.
« Last Edit: 2013-01-08, 18:48:46 by ION »


---------------------------
"Secrecy, secret societies and secret groups have always been repugnant to a free and open society"......John F Kennedy
   

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1443
Frequency equals matter...


Buy me a drink


---------------------------
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3842


Buy me some coffee
Thanks for the Link GK

ION well spotted i was trying to work out what he meant by compound, well that makes sense, i was trying to work out how a 1000ft of wire could be wound on a 24 inch iron rod, if it's axially wound first then that would be feasible, i wonder if an iron wire was used for the copper to be wound axially first.

Dam every time i think there is enough info to try a build, i always end up with a 100 ways to build something, very frustrating.

One thing i have been asking myself, is there any difference between modern materials and 1871 materials.

and i would say there is possibly a difference between soft iron and steel, iron losses all magnetism at rest, steel will hold a magnetic field.
   

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3480
tExB=qr
Cook says compound or simply wound.   

I think he uses compound to mean wound from one end with several overlapping turns, rather than in long layers from end to end. 

This lowers the capacitance between the windings.

His primary is the inner coil of finer wire.  Primary and secondary wound in the same direction.
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3842


Buy me some coffee
Get this

I just zoomed into the coil picture and counted the turns

Visible turns
C=23
b=61

but B has 5 turns sticking above coil C that gives us b=56 turns for the full length of C but C has 2 end rings for connection, these are equivalent of 5 B turns each end so if we now subtract our 2 end cap turns of 10 from the 56 which are left we get 46 which just so happens to be twice the turns of coil C  O0

We have now established the coils in the patent must be compound coils, so we have a 2:1 ratio with 5 turns as an antenna at the top of B, the copper end rings are on both coils so these compound 5 turns each end of Coil B get shorted in a very strange way as they get contacted by the copper ring.

I guess compound could also means litz
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3842


Buy me some coffee
I thought i would search early patents that use compound wound coils.

I found this one
http://www.google.com/patents/US546756?pg=PA8&dq=compound+coil&hl=en&sa=X&ei=FX3sULe1FvGY1AW9rIDoCg&ved=0CFMQ6AEwCA#v=onepage&q=compound%20coil&f=false

Read from 35 onwards.

I will keep looking
   

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3480
tExB=qr
per a dictionary, compound winding is a combination of series and shunt winding
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 805
I remember playing with the Cook coils a few years ago but no OU results.  Maybe my coil was too small.


Take a look at the graphic I drew up, and copied some of the relevant text from the patent.    Notice that the coils will develop the same magnetic fields polarity.  I underlined the text that leads me to this belief.  If you don't get it think about it some more.  


To start the device just induce a magnetic field between the coils and it will start.


edit:   I added another diagram illustrating the "simple" arrangement, with just two coils on two cores.   Also I'm showing the starting circuit.  If you analyze the curent and polarities,  it will be apparent that the magnetic field of one core will induce in the other the correct current shown, which builds up the magnetic field even more, so Cook really thought this thing out pretty good.  But there is a problem, when he current gets to the max, then once the magnetic field begins to decrease it decreases at a faster and faster rate, just like it went up.   It's basically a system with gain and it works both ways,  positive feedback on the way up and positive feedback on the way down.  


Actually, I think it's an over unity system if used properly.  We kick start with the smallest flux and energy, and it builds up from there on its own to the maximum possible level, perhaps until core saturation, at which point we need to disconnect and reap the benefits (capture the kickback) before the magnetic field starts to decrease again on its own and rapidly too due to the positive feedback.
 :)
« Last Edit: 2013-01-09, 04:23:52 by EMdevices »
   
Group: Elite
Hero Member
******

Posts: 3541
It's turtles all the way down
I will yield to the current definition of "compound coils".

Does anyone have the definition of a helix comprised of a sub-helix? compound helix?

I guess progress on the Cook coil arrangement can only be had when the correct large core is part of the assembly.

Perhaps a critical mass of core / inductance is required to get an over unity factor when other losses such as wire resistance is taken into account.

Anyone have good ideas to build such a core from easily obtainable materials?

When one reads the patent, the inventor seems sincere and appears to explain actual results, not theoretical results.

I guess it's time to move all this to the Cook coil thread, and a task for the new year......build this devil.


---------------------------
"Secrecy, secret societies and secret groups have always been repugnant to a free and open society"......John F Kennedy
   
Group: Guest
...

Actually, I think it's an over unity system if used properly
...

As I see no logic theory, no quantified estimation, no experiment giving the least clue of OU,

Actually, I think it's not an over unity system even if used properly

The truth being proportional to the police size and the color of the claim, I beat you at your own game, EM.   ;D ;D ;D

   
Group: Guest
I will yield to the current definition of "compound coils".

Does anyone have the definition of a helix comprised of a sub-helix? compound helix?

I think that there is no definition because there are many ways to build helix compounds. I saw here and there different sorts of helix, some being double helix like dna, others being crossing helix at an angle, 90 deg being a very interesting configuration that generates a transverse field instead of being along the winding cylinder, others being variable, to spatially modulate or rotate a field...

« Last Edit: 2013-01-09, 20:17:24 by exnihiloest »
   

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1443
Frequency equals matter...


Buy me a drink

Compound of 3 layers on a single wire iron core and a virtual ground around the outside.


---------------------------
   
Group: Guest
Quote
I like this device because it takes the term expertise to a new level, imagine the skill required to create a circuit which self-oscillates, which self-resonates without switching of any kind relying solely on the properties of the components and the qualities of the currents within it. Personally I know of no expert who has this level of understanding let alone the skills required to make it a reality and from some of the related experiments I have done this is very much harder than it appears.


HA HA HA HA, funny you should mention this. I am actually working on a completely passive transformer "network" which self oscillates, doubles its own frequency, and then injects the two harmonically related frequencies into a mag amp transformer for parametric conversion. No transistors, switching of any kind. Give me a ring and we can discuss.
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3842


Buy me some coffee
I agree ION. i can feel a build coming soon, i am currently also working on a plan.
I will move this thread tomorrow when i get some time to it's own board and thread.

I will use bundles of bare soft iron wire, varnished and wrapped 2 inch diameter 24 inch long, wrapped with paper & glue.

I want to find a way to build the coils so they are interchangeable, maybe wrap them on a carboard tube and drop them over the core etc.

Today i have sent an email to someone where Cook lived to see if the community knows of any information or pictures regarding the device, he had a picture posted on the web of Cooks flying machine that ultimately bankrupted Cook, the flying machine capsule still survives

Enjoy this video  ^-^
http://vimeo.com/31399217
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3173
It's not as complicated as it may seem...
I will yield to the current definition of "compound coils".

Does anyone have the definition of a helix comprised of a sub-helix? compound helix?
I agree with your definition for "compound coil" ION. I have somewhere some info on this type of coil, but I have not yet found it.

Part of the reason I have not pursued the Cook Coil invention, is because of the ambiguity involved in deciphering his patent. No one can seem to agree on what he means by the terminology used.

tao studied this patent a great deal, and he was not able to decipher it to sufficient certainty either.
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 805
You guys don't see it?  

The way the McFarland coils are wired is intended to create a stable point, or equilibrium point, at a high flux / current condition, where both coils produce the SAME POLARITY magnetic field.   The other mode is when the flux of one coil loops through the core of the other coil to form a closed loop, but this mode (odd mode) is suppressed by the way the coils are wired.  (see diagram below)

I studied this patent closely years ago, and came to the conclusion that the guy was simply wishing for something that is not possible.  He does not understand how transformers work, and this is evident from the language and the description.    For example, he does not address the basics of how induction works, that a CHANGING magnetic flux is what generates a voltage in the coils, and when the flux does not increase anymore, the voltage drops to zero, or he says nothing about the magnetization current required in a transformer.  My conclusion was that it is just a theoretical concept that somebody though of but never really got it to work because the theory he had was erroneous.

However, having said that, I try to learn something from everything, even a worthless patent and new thoughts can be born.   So,  if we approach the problem with the spirit that Daniel Cook had, we can now engineer a starting system for the coils that build up in flux on their own.  My objection is that his system of coils as described in the patent does not produce DC as he seems to claim, but it is an unstable electrical component which can be used to advantage.

I'll give you guys an example.   A magnet that approaches a ferromagnetic material is attracted to it and energy increases.  This is free energy from the atomic realm.  So even though this is a one way street, ( because it takes the same amount of energy to remove it,)  now with a coil system replacing the magnet, we can simulate this approaching behavior then after the attraction and energy increase is complete, we can "break" the magnet or disable it and thus remove it with no energy input.  Now we can repeat the cycle.  

So,  this configuration "works" but it requires an ingenious application.  It is only a small part required to play a role in a bigger system.

EM


PS.    EX, if a system of coils or magnetic material increases in magnetization all by itself,  energy has increased. This is exactly what an unstable coil system can achieve as wired in the patent.  This is what we call a NEGATIVE inductance inductor.     So when we apply a voltage to the inductor (on a third winding)  the voltage developed at the terminals is the negative of the back EMF, so it aids the current instead of trying to stop it, so the current increases some more. It is a positive feedback loop.

chew on that for a while.

 

edit:  I added the graphic below to illustrate the two magnetization modes.  Even vs Odd.  The way the coils are wired it prefers the EVEN mode, even though it is the higher energy mode.

I actually have doubts that the single coils configuration works,  it has to be the double helix coils configuration with a primary and secondary!  (even though he says in the patent that it works as well but needs to be longer)
« Last Edit: 2013-01-10, 06:04:08 by EMdevices »
   
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
« previous next »


 

Home Help Search Login Register
Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u 2021-08-02, 22:32:12