PopularFX
Home Help Search Login Register
Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.
2019-12-12, 13:25:02
News: Check out the Benches; a place for people to moderate their own thread and document their builds and data.
If you would like your own Bench, please PM an Admin.
Most Benches are visible only to members.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Author Topic: Graham Gunderson Energy conference High COP demonstration  (Read 154522 times)

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2906
It's not as complicated as it may seem...
Nice work PM.

Would you mind posting your sim file?
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2906
It's not as complicated as it may seem...
Very nice work, pm. I had my doubts, but you seemed to have demonstrated that a sim can show OU.

I can eat my hat now, got any salt?

Regards, ION

I think Pin is being measured across the input fet/diode/cap, not the primary. How much difference it will make I won't know until we see Pin done with the voltage across the primary.
   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 949
Nice work PM.

Would you mind posting your sim file?

No, find it attached below as a standard text file.

pm
   
Group: Elite
Hero Member
******

Posts: 3637
It's turtles all the way down
Partzman's sim should be dead easy to loop. One diode to decouple the voltage source and another diode from the output to the input.

You could try with ideal "lossless" diode models, but with a COP of >3 it should work with any diodes.

Alternately a momentary switch could turn of and decouple the voltage source allowing the system to go into runaway.

You could also adjust the turns ratio slightly to allow higher secondary voltage to overcome diode drops.


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

Posts: 949
Thank you ION and Poynt for your comments!

Inconsideration of Poynt's comment about measuring the power using the voltage across the primary rather than C4, I've attached a plot with the input reactive power taken with the 20 vdc supply subtracted from the voltage across L2.

pm 
   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 949
Partzman's sim should be dead easy to loop. One diode to decouple the voltage source and another diode from the output to the input.

You could try with ideal "lossless" diode models, but with a COP of >3 it should work with any diodes.

Alternately a momentary switch could turn of and decouple the voltage source allowing the system to go into runaway.

You could also adjust the turns ratio slightly to allow higher secondary voltage to overcome diode drops.

Well, not quite yet ION but I wish. O0 Our dc input power is 3.37w with our output power at 1.72w so our dc COP is .51. The COP >3 is real/reactive so we have some innovating and improving to do before we can loop dc to dc IMO.

pm
   
Newbie
*

Posts: 29
Well, not quite yet ION but I wish. O0 Our dc input power is 3.37w with our output power at 1.72w so our dc COP is .51. The COP >3 is real/reactive so we have some innovating and improving to do before we can loop dc to dc IMO.

pm

Hi PM,

Enjoying your work with the simulator.  Excellent work, It adds ideas for me too.  Keep it up!!!
I'm going to have to download that simulator and get up to speed on it!  I see it's free!

Ben K4ZEP
   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 949
Hi PM,

Enjoying your work with the simulator.  Excellent work, It adds ideas for me too.  Keep it up!!!
I'm going to have to download that simulator and get up to speed on it!  I see it's free!

Ben K4ZEP

Thanks Ben. The version I used for the sim I posted was LtSpice IV but you might try the new version XVII as it is available in 32 and 64 bit OS but I think it has problems running on XP however.

pm
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2906
It's not as complicated as it may seem...
No, find it attached below as a standard text file.

pm
Thanks. btw the forum should allow .asc file type attachments.
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2906
It's not as complicated as it may seem...
Thank you ION and Poynt for your comments!

Inconsideration of Poynt's comment about measuring the power using the voltage across the primary rather than C4, I've attached a plot with the input reactive power taken with the 20 vdc supply subtracted from the voltage across L2.

pm

Is that 2.81W? If so, there goes the transformer OU.  :(
   
Newbie
*

Posts: 29
Thanks Ben. The version I used for the sim I posted was LtSpice IV but you might try the new version XVII as it is available in 32 and 64 bit OS but I think it has problems running on XP however.

pm

Thanks PM,

I downloaded MAC version to my big MAC, can't get it to run.  Will download it to an old laptop running Win 8, work on it from there.
Something new to learn how to use!  A most useful tool I think. 

Ben K4ZEP
   

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3651


Buy me some coffee
TK,

As I understand Graham's input measurement points that is, at the transformer primary leads, he is not accounting for any losses in the H-bridge components nor the drive circuitry. Therefore, his apparent OU is measured between the transformer primary leads and the lamp load. Core losses are obviously going to be there but should be accounted for in his pin and pout measurements so I guess we are back to the question of his measurement accuracy.



pm

Quote
If we do assume his measurements are reasonably accurate and as they indicate apparent OU, the question of where the gain is coming from is obviously very important. I certainly don't have the answer!

Only the very closed minded will have trouble working out where the gain is coming from--those that are apposed to PMs doing useful work.



Brad


---------------------------
Never let your schooling get in the way of your education.
   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 949
Is that 2.81W? If so, there goes the transformer OU.  :(

With the cursor in the box it is hard to tell that it is -2.81w so I've attached a plot view taken in LtSpice XVII that is clearer to read.

For some reason when I tried to attach the *.asc file directly to the post it refused. I think I have done this before so I dunno! ???

pm
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2906
It's not as complicated as it may seem...
Yeah, I figured it was -2.81W.

But no big deal it being negative (it all depends on probe polarity or how/where you subtract the 20V). The fact is this accounts for the missing power and indicates the true Pin for the transformer.

Sorry, but the sim is not showing OU on the transformer, and thankfully, ION won't have to eat his hat!
   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 949
Thanks PM,

I downloaded MAC version to my big MAC, can't get it to run.  Will download it to an old laptop running Win 8, work on it from there.
Something new to learn how to use!  A most useful tool I think. 

Ben K4ZEP

Ben,

There is a good LtSpice group on Yahoo that is free to join and they have a lot of Mac users that have worked out the various problems one might encounter. Loads of files on circuits, models, and explanations on the help files which can be rather difficult to understand at times especially when just starting.

Good luck. O0

pm
   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 949
Only the very closed minded will have trouble working out where the gain is coming from--those that are apposed to PMs doing useful work.



Brad

Brad,

I believe that it is possible to extract energy from PMs. I would reference Smudge's theories on electron spin and possibly neutron spin for example for those who might question. For G's device, it might be nuclear spin interaction or it could be some type of flux or magnetic vector potential interaction or something else. I hope the answer comes to light!

pm
   

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3651


Buy me some coffee
Brad,

I believe that it is possible to extract energy from PMs. I would reference Smudge's theories on electron spin and possibly neutron spin for example for those who might question. For G's device, it might be nuclear spin interaction or it could be some type of flux or magnetic vector potential interaction or something else. I hope the answer comes to light!

pm

I believe all that is needed is to make the linear force of a PM -non linear,and it would seem that that is what the outcome would be in GGs transformer.

Also pm,do you believe that all that fancy switching is really needed in GGs setup,or is it a rouse to complicate things beyond replication?.

I believe that my FG is able to create the input voltage wave form that GG shows,simply by using the 1 shot mode,and determining the rest phase between each shot relative to the frequency required. This signal could then be used to drive an audio amp. Then all we need is to work on the transformer and circuit to produce the input current wave form.

Looking at GGs scope shot's,it would appear that he is measuring the output voltage across the load,and the current into the smoothing cap,after the mosfets used as the rectifier ?-im not sure,this may have already been discussed,and i have not been following that closely,due to other commitments.


Brad


---------------------------
Never let your schooling get in the way of your education.
   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 949
Yeah, I figured it was -2.81W.

But no big deal it being negative (it all depends on probe polarity or how/where you subtract the 20V). The fact is this accounts for the missing power and indicates the true Pin for the transformer.

Sorry, but the sim is not showing OU on the transformer, and thankfully, ION won't have to eat his hat!

Poynt,

I have to respectively disagree so I'll give my logical explanation for this issue.

I've attached a plot that shows the Ecap voltage minus 20 volts for graphical reference. It is true that the Ecap voltage is the voltage across C4 but it also is the voltage across the primary L2 that is displaced by +20v above our reference point. Therefore logically it would seem that we should subtract 20 volts from the Ecap voltage to arrive at the actual voltage across L2 in reference to ground. The current and voltage polarities remain the same.

It is interesting to me that since the V8 supply has zero impedance at the op frequency, the equivalent circuit of L2 and C4 is a parallel resonant configuration instead of series as I originally described.

pm
   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 949
I believe all that is needed is to make the linear force of a PM -non linear,and it would seem that that is what the outcome would be in GGs transformer.

TM,

It would appear so.

Quote
Also pm,do you believe that all that fancy switching is really needed in GGs setup,or is it a rouse to complicate things beyond replication?.

With my understanding, Graham had little time to whip the device together before the seminar as is evidenced by the hacked circuitry. I also think he immediately began to re-work the device after the seminar (according to those close to him that have posted here) because he realized it is not in it's simplest form yet. So no, I'm not convinced the device needs to be as complicated as his original disclosure but I don't have one operating on my bench either. :-\

Quote
I believe that my FG is able to create the input voltage wave form that GG shows,simply by using the 1 shot mode,and determining the rest phase between each shot relative to the frequency required. This signal could then be used to drive an audio amp. Then all we need is to work on the transformer and circuit to produce the input current wave form.

With a generator that versatile your idea sure sounds doable. I wish there was more info on those cores!

Quote
Looking at GGs scope shot's,it would appear that he is measuring the output voltage across the load,and the current into the smoothing cap,after the mosfets used as the rectifier ?-im not sure,this may have already been discussed,and i have not been following that closely,due to other commitments.

Brad

I know the current waveform shows the secondary current but exactly where he has placed the probe I'm not certain!

pm

   
Group: Guest
Brad,

I believe that it is possible to extract energy from PMs. I would reference Smudge's theories on electron spin and possibly neutron spin for example for those who might question. For G's device, it might be nuclear spin interaction or it could be some type of flux or magnetic vector potential interaction or something else. I hope the answer comes to light!

pm

So do either of you believe that it is possible to extract _more_ energy from a PM than was applied to the base material in order to magnetize it in the first place?

What happens to the magnet when you extract energy from it? Does it become less and less magnetic? If you extract energy from "nuclear spin interaction" does the material change properties, become more brittle, evaporate, emit radiation, or what? Is it channelling dark energy from the expansion of the cosmos?
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 530
Looking at GGs scope shot's,it would appear that he is measuring the output voltage across the load,and the current into the smoothing cap,after the mosfets used as the rectifier ?-im not sure,this may have already been discussed,and i have not been following that closely,due to other commitments.
Brad

@tinman

If we all agree that @Spokane1's initial diagram is correct, then his output measurement is surely being juiced up by the logic controller that is bleeding into the output. Otherwise explain the dc flat line output while you see an h-bridge input of 1/3 pulse, 1/3 reverse pulse and a 1/3 pause. Not even a glitch can be seen on the output. My spider senses tell me GG realized this error but decided instead of owning up to it, he just mothballed the device and now you guys and others are left in the cold. Classic pattern of bait and switch. This cannot be a learning experience but another sleuthing series.

If there is reactive power involved then any lone diodes or diodes in mosfets would easily bleed backwards.

As for a $27 demo price, I don't pay for demos. That would be tantamount to Georgian TKism. If the demo is prime, I do give donations and $27 would be chump change. It's the principle. I never buy what I do not know I will get.

So I am on the sidelines on this one. I have great theories of operation according to spin conveyance, what he is doing wrong, what is right, what can weak magnets do to a core already moving good watts (nothing), but all this is pointless without the truth of the matter and that is only available from GG who I feel is not forthcoming. So again, for me such a deal is a bad deal. Better just spend time on other matters. Guys should stop weighing a pound of nothing. If the effort is purely a means to keep the knife sharpened, then it is a good FUN exercise otherwise thinking these outside efforts will replicate his device is not a smart move. Not until we know exactly the situation from GG himself. And I guess, as usual, that will never happen.

You do not need to replicate anything. You actually just need to understand the principle and once that is understood it can be tried and tested in small scale on any bench. But first, what is the principle? He even said it himself, he does not know why it works. That is the most ludicrous statement anyone can make that has obviously spent countless days and nights, probably has a box full of notes, knows 2000 times more about it then anyone else could to say such a thing. You can at least say "I THINK IT IS BASED ON................". Only someone who wants to mothball the problem would say what he said. So again, you can play games but you cannot hide human nature. That's pasted on our faces, our words and our choices of action. Mothball then ask to 2M$, then declare OU as being concrete to sell a demo video, all these words and actions do not spell true OU intent.

wattsup

 


---------------------------
   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 949
So do either of you believe that it is possible to extract _more_ energy from a PM than was applied to the base material in order to magnetize it in the first place?

What happens to the magnet when you extract energy from it? Does it become less and less magnetic? If you extract energy from "nuclear spin interaction" does the material change properties, become more brittle, evaporate, emit radiation, or what? Is it channelling dark energy from the expansion of the cosmos?

TK,

Good questions. Many, many moons ago I ran a bench experiment based on one of Smudge's papers using PMs in a coil arrangement and there appeared to be a slight gain. The problem is I didn't document very well at the time and I can't even remember what it was about. Could have been measurement error as well!

I was also the one who experienced OU in a MEG configuration way back when using MOVs for loads . Placement of PMs in the core did increase the output power and the measurements were taken on a Voltech PM3000 3-phase power analyzer which provided the means of measuring both input and output power simultaneously. The secondaries finally broke down with internal arcing and being they were so tedious to wind on the U cores, I quit the project. 

I would recommend Stefan Marinov's "Thorny Way of Truth Part3" which is available free online and read about his experiments using PMs with analysis using vector potentials. His devices and others he references are OU per their claims.

Basically, I can't give you any satisfying answers to your questions regarding energy extraction from PMs, but I still maintain the idea that it is possible.

pm
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2906
It's not as complicated as it may seem...
Poynt,

I have to respectively disagree so I'll give my logical explanation for this issue.
I don't understand your point/argument, sorry.

Respectfully, I have to say I stand by my statement.

A few salient points from "Power Measurement 101":

1) The power of a source, or a component (or device as a whole) is measured by taking the voltage directly across it and the current into (through) it and multiplying the two for power as a product. For scope type measurements, the average (MEAN) is taken of a minimum of 10 cycles of operation of this product. (There is obviously a bit more detail here I've not included for clarity).

2) The polarity of "power" when correctly measured for a source is negative. The polarity of "power" for all loads connected to a source are positive. Most often folks ignore the polarity however.

3) As a consequence of 2), power is conservative. Just as there is "KVL", there is also an implied "KPL", whereby all the "powers" in a circuit and source sum to zero.

Let's take your sim for example:

a) Power measured from the 20V source is 3.38W. Correct.

b) Power measured in the 50 Ohm load is 1.72W. Correct.

c) Power measured across MOSFET/DIODE/CAP is 0.561W. This is incorrectly associated with input power to the transformer. As per 1) above, it is not.

d) Power measured/computed when 20V is subtracted from the voltage measurement in c), is 2.81W. This is the actual input power measurement as per 1) above.

Surely you do not believe that by strange coincidence, 3.38W=0.561W + 2.81W ? I can assure you that it is not a coincidence. This is simply an illustration of the power balance in every circuit (in this case, between the 20V source, and the input side of the transformer).

What about the 1.72W measured in the 50 Ohm load? Since we know that 2.81W is what goes into the primary (and comes out the secondary), we know that the remaining 1.09W (2.81W-1.72W) must be getting dissipated in the output MOSFET.

Attached is a diagram illustrating the above points. Note, L5 is actually a source on the output side of the transformer, so its power is negative at -2.81W. There are two power loops, one on the input and one on the output side, and each sums to zero as per 3) above.
« Last Edit: 2016-08-07, 19:37:38 by poynt99 »
   
Newbie
*

Posts: 29
Ben,

There is a good LtSpice group on Yahoo that is free to join and they have a lot of Mac users that have worked out the various problems one might encounter. Loads of files on circuits, models, and explanations on the help files which can be rather difficult to understand at times especially when just starting.

Good luck. O0

pm

Thanks PM,

Got it to run on the MAC.  I'll look up that group on Yahoo!  It really is a good tool.
Thanks for the info!!!  Files, circuits, etc.  Good to load up on!! :) 

All the yea's and nay's on this group now!  Only way to know is to build, experiment,
come to our own conclusions. 

Ben K4ZEP
   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 949
I don't understand your point/argument, sorry.

Respectfully, I have to say I stand by my statement.

A few salient points from "Power Measurement 101":

1) The power of a source, or a component (or device as a whole) is measured by taking the voltage directly across it and the current into (through) it and multiplying the two for power as a product. For scope type measurements, the average (MEAN) is taken of a minimum of 10 cycles of operation of this product. (There is obviously a bit more detail here I've not included for clarity).

2) The polarity of "power" when correctly measured for a source is negative. The polarity of "power" for all loads connected to a source are positive. Most often folks ignore the polarity however.

3) As a consequence of 2), power is conservative. Just as there is "KVL", there is also an implied "KPL", whereby all the "powers" in a circuit and source sum to zero.

Let's take your sim for example:

a) Power measured from the 20V source is 3.38W. Correct.

b) Power measured in the 50 Ohm load is 1.72W. Correct.

c) Power measured across MOSFET/DIODE/CAP is 0.561W. This is incorrectly associated with input power to the transformer. As per 1) above, it is not.

d) Power measured/computed when 20V is subtracted from the voltage measurement in c), is 2.81W. This is the actual input power measurement as per 1) above.

Surely you do not believe that by strange coincidence, 3.38W=0.561W + 2.81W ? I can assure you that it is not a coincidence. This is simply an illustration of the power balance in every circuit (in this case, between the 20V source, and the input side of the transformer).

What about the 1.72W measured in the 50 Ohm load? Since we know that 2.81W is what goes into the primary (and comes out the secondary), we know that the remaining 1.09W (2.81W-1.72W) must be getting dissipated in the output MOSFET.

Attached is a diagram illustrating the above points. Note, L5 is actually a source on the output side of the transformer, so its power is negative at -2.81W. There are two power loops, one on the input and one on the output side, and each sums to zero as per 3) above.

Poynt,

All you had to say was "PM, you need to reverse or invert the current thru L2 because the reference point is inverted" without all the condescending verbiage. Yes, you are correct in that no OU is present and I am sure with that you are pleased.

pm 
   
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
« previous next »


 

Home Help Search Login Register
Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u 2019-12-12, 13:25:02