PopularFX
Home Help Search Login Register
Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.
2024-04-20, 18:44:38
News: If you have a suggestion or need for a new board title, please PM the Admins.
Please remember to keep topics and posts of the FE or casual nature. :)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7
Author Topic: Edwin Vincent Gray's conversion tube  (Read 84689 times)
Group: Moderator
Newbie
*****

Posts: 43
How were they wound and how were they pulsed?

Standard solenoid wound. The first two versions had single windings. The last version was a little more complicated with three windings. The inner most winding was 200 turns. While the second and third were 200 turns bifilar wound. My intent was to have the potential for different winding patterns. All I found was that the performance depended upon the total Ampere-Turns.

Of course I went El-cheap-O and only used a single power supply. I also attempted various versions of interrupting the current, but that was on the primary side. I never thought of interrupting an isolated secondary winding. But by then my inspiration was grinding to a halt.

All I can do now is look back and consider all the mistakes I made.


What was Ed Gray getting?


E. V. Gray never set up a meaningful experiment. He would put together eye-candy demonstrations and then tell people how wonderful they were. The original demos prior to 1971 might have had some real zing in them. But after 1981 they were pure bogus. One example to be seen from the 1986 promotion video was the Space Shuttle model. That model weighed 45 lbs. and reached a height of about 9'. What he didn't disclose was that he was using a 1500 mfd capacitor charged to near 5 kV. If you do the math that comes out to a COP of about 2%. (Details came form his son Mark Gray).

There are other accounts of Mr. Gray popping a 2 lb. coil about 36", but the size of the storage capacitor was never disclosed. (and he was using two of them)

If something becomes of this iron wire exploration then I'm going to head right back into popping coil designs. They are simple to make and the energy in vs energy out is very easy to measure. After that then moving into a motor design would be the next step. I would prefer an opposing Burke design rather than the rotary approach that Hackenburger used.


The static floating flux field would be what Spherics called a SEP coil (Static Ether Pattern)

Did you try a static magnetic field around the popping coils, or a DC offset so that the pulse is switched over a few hundred volts of DC?

I never did anything that sophisticated. When looking at the 1973 shop photos of Mr. Hackenburger doing popping coil demos the component that is assumed to take the place of the Floating Flux Field on the motor is kind of remote from the location of the coils.  My present thoughts on the FFF is that it is an energy harvesting device that recharged the pulse capacitors from anomalous energy that escaped the "Radiant Event" process while the bulk of the kinetic energy was collected from physical repulsion.

There is a lot that can be done with added D.C. offset voltages. But right now I don't know what they do or why.

Mark McKay
   
Group: Moderator
Newbie
*****

Posts: 43

I don't think that coil will work as stubblefield intended.

It certainly will not work as Mr. Stubblefield intended. There is no electrolyte provided.
Right now it is the only coil I have that has an Iron winding. Close enough for garage scientist work.

un-coated oxidized copper/iron wire can act as oxide surface rectifiers, if whetted by mineral/salt water a battery or all the above.
[/quote]

Yes, I figure that the partial diode action is critical to Mr. Stubblefield's energy harvest system. I wonder if he was aware of that feature? Most likely this only worked at the lower current/voltage levels.

Even more ingenious was using multi-layer/multi-metal oxidized substrates to act similar to the doped layer/band gap of solar cell. As we now know certain solar cells having different doped layers can even work at night harnessing different kinds of energy.

Good point, but I really doubt that Mr. Stubblefield was working with multi/layer substrates in 1898, but he could have when he was making those radiant heating plates for his cabin. To bad he suffered from some kind of terminal PTSD after all the family and business disappointments in his life.


Mark McKay
   

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3941
tExB=qr
Standard solenoid wound. The first two versions had single windings. The last version was a little more complicated with three windings. The inner most winding was 200 turns. While the second and third were 200 turns bifilar wound. My intent was to have the potential for different winding patterns. All I found was that the performance depended upon the total Ampere-Turns.

Of course I went El-cheap-O and only used a single power supply. I also attempted various versions of interrupting the current, but that was on the primary side. I never thought of interrupting an isolated secondary winding. But by then my inspiration was grinding to a halt.

All I can do now is look back and consider all the mistakes I made.

E. V. Gray never set up a meaningful experiment. He would put together eye-candy demonstrations and then tell people how wonderful they were. The original demos prior to 1971 might have had some real zing in them. But after 1981 they were pure bogus. One example to be seen from the 1986 promotion video was the Space Shuttle model. That model weighed 45 lbs. and reached a height of about 9'. What he didn't disclose was that he was using a 1500 mfd capacitor charged to near 5 kV. If you do the math that comes out to a COP of about 2%. (Details came form his son Mark Gray).

There are other accounts of Mr. Gray popping a 2 lb. coil about 36", but the size of the storage capacitor was never disclosed. (and he was using two of them)

If something becomes of this iron wire exploration then I'm going to head right back into popping coil designs. They are simple to make and the energy in vs energy out is very easy to measure. After that then moving into a motor design would be the next step. I would prefer an opposing Burke design rather than the rotary approach that Hackenburger used.

I never did anything that sophisticated. When looking at the 1973 shop photos of Mr. Hackenburger doing popping coil demos the component that is assumed to take the place of the Floating Flux Field on the motor is kind of remote from the location of the coils.  My present thoughts on the FFF is that it is an energy harvesting device that recharged the pulse capacitors from anomalous energy that escaped the "Radiant Event" process while the bulk of the kinetic energy was collected from physical repulsion.

There is a lot that can be done with added D.C. offset voltages. But right now I don't know what they do or why.

Mark McKay

How do you know iron wire was used?  Do you know for what purpose it was used?

Do you have a good photo of the early popping coils?

The DC offset, or encompassing coil with DC applied, is what you want the pulse to interact with.  Speculation: The impulse causes a change in density of "space/ether/aether/ZPE/Dirac Sea", and since you have already patterned it into a magnetic field, the magnetic field is now changed accordingly.  I know the magnetic field is stronger but not why. 

In Ed's patent he says that the delay coils are the same coils as the floating flux field.  His operating description sounds like these delay coils are pulsed more than the repulsing coils as he says the pulses charge the caps, but not in one pulse.
   

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3941
tExB=qr
PeterAE's and Poynt99's compressed pulse work here:

https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=272.msg70437#msg70437
   

Hero Member
*****

Posts: 543
Spherics told us how iron wire is used as a delay element in a bifilar coil method used by Steven Mark in his TPU's.  PeterAE (one of the owners of this forum) explored this method for some time and verified that what Spherics said was correct to some degree.  With delays on one leg of the bifilar of about 180ns to 220ns, the applied pulses are compressed into a large narrow pulse.  The iron wire has to be away form the bifilar for it to work.  Any iron near the RE producing coil causes it to not work.  Note that bifilar coils used in this way make loud popping sounds when the delay is adjusted for maximum pulse peak.  This was with only 30v.  I can't imagine what KV's would do.

All of the methods of RE production that Spherics shared are low power compared to anything Tesla or Ed Gray did.  He used RE to interact with a magnetic field or gravity to induce a current in a coil.  He explained a couple of methods for RE detection, and ways to charge batteries and capacitors.  Spherics mentioned cold current, but never explained what it is.  Hence my initial question.

Steven Mark found out latter that he could wrap the iron wire delay pieces with the other coils if he wrapped all of them with a solenoid coil supplied with DC.  Apparently magnetizing the iron wire allows the compressed pulse to be produced in the bifilar coils, else the iron wire prevents it from occurring.

That would make sense if the iron wire was being saturated by the adjacent field(s).  Magnetic amplifiers are often biased with a constant-current source so that they rest right on the 'knee' of the BH curve.

In Spherics posts it always sounded like he used very short lengths of iron wire for delay, and not a coil made from it.  Does present us with a good future experiment though, testing bare iron vs iron saturated with a constant-current source or saturated with a neodymium magnet, to see what effect it has on this 'COMP' field.


---------------------------
"An overly-skeptical scientist might hastily conclude by scooping and analyzing a thousand buckets of ocean water that the ocean has no fish in it."
   
Group: Moderator
Newbie
*****

Posts: 43
How do you know iron wire was used?  Do you know for what purpose it was used?

See Post #76


Do you have a good photo of the early popping coils?

Check out the attached paper. My analysis of the popping coils from 2011 and a lot of other speculation.

In Ed's patent he says that the delay coils are the same coils as the floating flux field.  His operating description sounds like these delay coils are pulsed more than the repulsing coils as he says the pulses charge the caps, but not in one pulse.

Mr. Grumpy, keep in mind that E.V. Gray didn't have the technical horsepower to effectively talk about the other peoples invention. He did pickup a lot of technical jargon to weave together a sales pitch, something he was good at.

Dr. Chavan wrote the patent for a fee in order to make investors think they had protection. Gray and the real people behind the scenes knew full well there was no way to protect this technology. They were hoping for one big buyout from a car company. Mr. Chavan was given original Marvin Cole mechanical drawings but not the details of the vibrator power supply nor the pole to pole arcing switching. There were a lot of other electrical details omitted as well. Dr. Chavan wasn't given all the technical facts either. He and is partner Dr. Mel Weston became board members hoping that the secret would be reveled to them - it was not. What Dr. Chavan didn't know he made up something that sounded good for the sake of the patent and his fee.

Years later he still kept the flame going for this technology. He was the one who inspired Mr. Reggie Garcia about this technology. Mr. Garcia eventually purchased the Purple Motor for around $50,000.

So, take all that technical description in the patents with a huge grain of salt.

Mark McKay

P.S. Here are some photos from the paper showing some of the assumed original Popping coils with their novel dielectric spacers. A lot more and others are shown in the Chapter 11 paper.
« Last Edit: 2022-10-11, 18:17:53 by Spokane 1 »
   

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3941
tExB=qr
Then how could anyone ever reproduce Ed Gray's technology?
   
Group: Moderator
Newbie
*****

Posts: 43
Then how could anyone ever reproduce Ed Gray's technology?

Well Grumpy, that is a very good question. I might look like a fool for trying but at my age (72) who gives a rip?
First you have to start with a firm conviction that the disclosed process is:
1. Real
2. Produces a usable energy output at a substantial COP
3. Is composed of parts and materials available to the garage scientist.
4. Could be reproduced in part or whole within an acceptable budget.
The “Gray” technology as presented in D.S. Peter Lindemann’s book “The Free Energy Secrets of Cold Electricity” seemed to meet these requirements. The main selling point was the 3rd party vetting of this technology. I dug into the company who did the evaluation and the reviewers who did the actual tests. I was convinced that the technology was real, and the reviewers were well qualified. The measured output was better than anything I had read about at the time.
Next came the years of interviews, experiments, reading, and soul searching. But I couldn’t deny that these people were on to something powerful but for several reasons (like death) it fell from their hands. A common story in this business.

By collecting all the fragments, speculations, stories, political intrigue, and honest observations I was able to at least get a framework of what this technology was all about and what it was not. But none of this could make the leap from power supply components to a non-classical converter without some novel process that involved the parts on hand. (Or easily acquired)

The first theory breakthrough came from the McFreey paper that was attempting to explain the operation of the TPU device in terms of iron transmutation that was stimulated by a process call Acoustic Resonance that involved electron spin gyrations being upset by means of an RF burst. Well, the concept sounded interesting, but the critics panned it because there was no classical particle that met the energy profile described. Oh well, at the time there appeared to be an army of researchers working on TPU replications.
The idea of iron (or other metal) transmutation seemed interesting, so I collected writings on the subject. Even Dr. Tesla had his thoughts on the useful properties of iron wire. It became apparent that other inventors were using iron wire as well, but the method of stimulation appeared different.

A possible solution came together at the convention this last July with Mr. Hakasays and Dr. Marsh adding the missing pieces. The theory fits all the constraints I have observed. Now to see if it performs. It is not the end all be all. It is just one interesting possibility of a core process that I think is worth exploring. Maybe in a few months it will prove to be another bust.

Mark McKay
   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1981
...
First you have to start with a firm conviction that the disclosed process is:
1. Real
2. Produces a usable energy output at a substantial COP
3. Is composed of parts and materials available to the garage scientist.
4. Could be reproduced in part or whole within an acceptable budget.
...
Mark McKay

Mark,

Do you own one that has these properties?


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

Hero Member
*****

Posts: 543

The first theory breakthrough came from the McFreey paper that was attempting to explain the operation of the TPU device in terms of iron transmutation that was stimulated by a process call Acoustic Resonance that involved electron spin gyrations being upset by means of an RF burst. Well, the concept sounded interesting, but the critics panned it because there was no classical particle that met the energy profile described. Oh well, at the time there appeared to be an army of researchers working on TPU replications.
The idea of iron (or other metal) transmutation seemed interesting, so I collected writings on the subject. Even Dr. Tesla had his thoughts on the useful properties of iron wire. It became apparent that other inventors were using iron wire as well, but the method of stimulation appeared different.


I had great interest in the McFreey paper as well.  I think McFreey saw anomalous excitation and extrapolated from his physics background that nuclear transmutation+decay was the best fit to explain it.  IMO the modus operandi is a combination of regular and parametric excitation.


One related thing I remember reading (may have been from you, Mark :P) was how the etymology of 'magnet wire' had changed by the early 1900's.
Before extruded oxygen-free copper wire was commonplace, magnet wire was often short for 'magnetic wire', or iron wire.  Which was by-far the more common element throughout much of the telegraph era.  Useful to know when researching patents and writings from that era. ;)


---------------------------
"An overly-skeptical scientist might hastily conclude by scooping and analyzing a thousand buckets of ocean water that the ocean has no fish in it."
   
Group: Moderator
Newbie
*****

Posts: 43
Mark,

Do you own one that has these properties?

Dear F6FLT,

No I do not own one of these. One was presented for testing at Caltech in May of 1972. It got ran through the metal shredder by the LA DA in 1973.
My quest is to recover this lost technology - and it has been a bitch of a job. Success is not guaranteed.

The attached drawing shows what the overall experimental evaluation method was. Many people today assume that the "Motor" produced classical electricity. It did not. It produced torque that was converted by a classical generator into classical electricity.

Mark McKay
   
Group: Moderator
Newbie
*****

Posts: 43
I had great interest in the McFreey paper as well.  I think McFreey saw anomalous excitation and extrapolated from his physics background that nuclear transmutation+decay was the best fit to explain it.  IMO the modus operandi is a combination of regular and parametric excitation.

Yes, that was a whole new concept for me. That guy (or gal) was really thinking outside of the box. Even though the specific mechanism might have failed it provided food for thought as to a process that could explain the huge non-classical energy gains.


One related thing I remember reading (may have been from you, Mark :P) was how the etymology of 'magnet wire' had changed by the early 1900's.
Before extruded oxygen-free copper wire was commonplace, magnet wire was often short for 'magnetic wire', or iron wire.  Which was by-far the more common element throughout much of the telegraph era.  Useful to know when researching patents and writings from that era. ;)

That didn't come from me, but I will certainly put it into my lexicon of data points concerning iron wire history.

Mark McKay
   
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 462
   
Group: Moderator
Newbie
*****

Posts: 43
Mark you are right about Tesla. Radiant energy is produced by his transmitters https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/originalDocument?CC=GB&NR=190111293A&KC=A&FT=D&ND=3&date=19011102&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP

Dear Forest,

That UK patent seems to be a summary of devices Dr. Tesla patented starting in 1898 in the US.

I never could figure those devices out. It seems like something important is missing. With only classical circuit analysis at hand what he presented seemed trivial.
However, the Corium brothers did state that the coherer device he used was sensitive enough to detect his kind of energy directly. He had some way to treat the metal shavings to become more responsive to wireless transmission. He never did disclose the process. Just like he never reveled the secrets of his transmitter or the details of his single electrode transmission element later on.

If you can get some engineering direction out of those documents - then  more power to you. I'm sure they worked just as described for Dr. Tesla.

Mark McKay
   
Full Member
***

Posts: 212
Here's some more details about the testing protocol, from darkspeed's 2010 2-20 post in the Gray's Devices folder:
   

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3941
tExB=qr
Researcher "Darkspeed" explored RE on his bench here years ago.  He used ignitrons and other pulse power devices.
https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?board=85.0

The effects that magnetized stuff far from the coils is interesting too.

He had a thread about a "bulb of death" that was very interesting.
https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=35.msg742#msg742

Notice the silver-carbon diode...

Here Darkspeed talks about the bulb making him puke:
https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=562.msg9462#msg9462
   
Full Member
***

Posts: 212
That's interesting.   I met someone in recent months who had silver in her charisma, something I've been trying to understand.  That and all the destructive effects that seemed to have entered into my life.  Including some "thousand year rain events" (according to the local paper), one of which resulted in the pickup camper being turned upside down and moved some distance to the NE.  (After the sideways rain reversed direction).
   
Group: Moderator
Newbie
*****

Posts: 43
Researcher "Darkspeed" explored RE on his bench here years ago.  He used ignitrons and other pulse power devices.
https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?board=85.0

The effects that magnetized stuff far from the coils is interesting too.

He had a thread about a "bulb of death" that was very interesting.
https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=35.msg742#msg742

Notice the silver-carbon diode...

Here Darkspeed talks about the bulb making him puke:
https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=562.msg9462#msg9462

Those are certainly interesting topics in their own right, but are not central to my present quest. The novel energy I'm looking for displays itself as a huge repulsion force. That is where the usable classical energy can be harvested. I don't know if "Grays" Cold Electricity is related to Dr. Tesla's Radiant Energy or if they a a vastly different horses. In the last chapters of Dr. Tesla's Radiant history it appears that that his kind of energy could be powerful and projected out of a "Lenard" type glass enclosure with enough magnitude to transmit kilowatts at a distance, or so the claims go. The amateur public reports of RE so far may do things at a distance but the effective energy levels seem very low.

I'm sure the researchers you mention have circuit elements that may be found in a device that might reliably generate a novel energy beam that we can call Radiant Energy. But right now there is no proof that Radiant Energy by itself is an OU process or just a different mode of energy transmission.

The "Gray" Cold Electricity, if it were really powerful by itself, would have been used directly rather than spending gobs of money and time developing a rotary converter. The "Cold" electricity may have had some interesting properties that made for good eye-candy demos but the real use was in exciting opposing coils to convert that "Cold" electricity into a powerful force or torque.

I'm going to take the rest of this space and attach some un related photos of the Hackenburger Power Supply. Our viewers really seem to dig hardware photos, no to so much white paper commentaries.

Thank you for your reading recommendations and the links to review them.

Mark McKay
   
Group: Moderator
Newbie
*****

Posts: 43
I missed an important one.
   
Full Member
***

Posts: 212
Here's some more details about the testing protocol, from darkspeed's 2010 2-20 post in the Gray's Devices folder:

Looking at some of the specs in the evaluation report, here are some quick figures:

     1,100 RPM
  ÷ 60 sec/minute
  = 18 1/3  rotations/sec

     3 shots/rotation
  = 55 shots/sec

     6,000 cps (non Hertzian)
  ÷ 55
  = 109 pulses/charge cycle

to bring the capacitor bank to operating potential.

P.S.:  Looking at that inverter with the red case, Mark, that looks like a one kW unit.  What do you estimate?  And HOW MANY hP does that kick over?
   
Group: Moderator
Newbie
*****

Posts: 43
Looking at some of the specs in the evaluation report, here are some quick figures:

     1,100 RPM
  ÷ 60 sec/minute
  = 18 1/3  rotations/sec

     3 shots/rotation
  = 55 shots/sec

     6,000 cps (non Hertzian)
  ÷ 55
  = 109 pulses/charge cycle

to bring the capacitor bank to operating potential.

P.S.:  Looking at that inverter with the red case, Mark, that looks like a one kW unit.  What do you estimate?  And HOW MANY hP does that kick over?


Jerry,

1 kW is equal to about 1.25 HP. In Electrical Engineering you roughly figure 1 HP per kW to cover all the incidental transmission losses from the utility connection to the actual load.

Keep in mind that the Crosby Research Report was based upon the EMA4-E1 which was a 9 pole machine that employed a funky firing order (defiantly not the one listed in the patent commentary).  If you look at the drawings that show how the capacitors are connected relative to the rotating contacts you get a different picture of its operation. To me it appears that for three positions both sets of opposing electromagnets are fired. Then the next six positions are fired with only one electromagnet. This switching action is mediated by the moving bobbin that switches the contacts between two modes of operation - it is not for speed control. That was done with various battery voltages. To me that suggests that one mode of operation is to charge the capacitors and the second mode is to extract torque, or the other way around. This was a hugely complex process, but they must have though that was the only way they could do it. Hackenburger was able to get rid of that process in the Kansas Era motors.

The Hackenburger Power Supply was designed for one of the three pole motors. I strongly believe that it is a classical DC to DC inverter that can only top off the 50 mfd capacitors used. There had to have been an effective energy recovery system employed. I believe that is what the large extra stator coils are for in the Purple Motor along with the second set of batteries. I suspect that when the electrostatic explosion took place between the electromagnet coils a huge charge was collected and stored in one of the capacitors. The battery was connected to the other side. All those mobile charge carriers were sucked into the opposite side of the capacitor and they raise their potential form 12 V to around 5kV. This is a process described in the Le May patent. Simple but fits with what I have picked up. You need a diode to act as a check valve. But that is where I believe 95% of the capacitor recharge comes from - not the excitation power supply which may have been used just for the initial shot. I can send you a copy of the Le May patent. I think it has real merit in our quest.

So the two systems required different specifications from their respective power supplies.

More Photos for the viewers.

Mark McKay
   
Group: Moderator
Newbie
*****

Posts: 43
Had to Re-Do one
   
Newbie
*

Posts: 41
Yes, that was a whole new concept for me. That guy (or gal) was really thinking outside of the box. Even though the specific mechanism might have failed it provided food for thought as to a process that could explain the huge non-classical energy gains.


Thank you all for this interesting discussion.

I also read the McFreey papers with great interest at the time, but was really disappointed at the end. Not because the theory presented there seems to be inconclusive, but because, if it is used as an explanation for such devices as Kapanadze and TPU, it turns these devices into truly fuel-consuming energy-generating devices. The fuel is the building material such as copper and iron itself, and those who then build a replica of it would consequently also have to perceive a drop in performance at some point in operational use after a certain degree of the material has been transmuted.

Hopefully this will not prove true and McFreey is wrong in his hypotheses. Energy from the ether without the consumption of any fuel is far better. So to say from the wheelwork of nature.  ;)
   
Full Member
***

Posts: 212
Mark,

The point about the inverter size is that most of the torque appears to be coming from the battery energy.

And can you move the lengthly email exchanges to the forum?  I only have so much typing time, and I'd prefer that everyone benefit from being able to consider my input.  Just the discussion, not the unending stream of documentation (edit: which buries discussion /edit); I already have the documentation that I need.  And yours isn't accompanied by discussion.
« Last Edit: 2022-10-13, 16:58:00 by Jerry Volland »
   
Full Member
***

Posts: 212
Mark,

I've been doing some research on Ignitron commutation.  Most of the articles are behind a pay wall, including the one about a twin tube MW inverter ($35), but some information can be gleaned from the abstracts.  It seems that all Ignitrons can be commutated, not just the 7171 model used by Gray.  One abstract states that the voltage transient produced when one tube is turned on switches the other one off.  Another abstract indicates that any thing more negative than -.5V will work.  Still another abstract mentions that Ignition commutation is the same as commutating an SCR.  That's a really simple circuit and I'll dig it out when I have time.  Unless some other Member will help by posting it.
   
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7
« previous next »


 

Home Help Search Login Register
Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u 2024-04-20, 18:44:38