Cookies-law

Cookies help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
http://www.overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please leave this website now. Many thanks for your understanding.
Amazon Warehouse Deals ! Now even more Deep Discounts ! Check out these great prices on slightly used or just opened once only items.I always buy my gadgets via these great Warehouse deals ! Highly recommended ! Many thanks for supporting OverUnity.com this way.

DC2DC converter

Micro JouleThief

FireMatch

FireMatch

CCKnife

CCKnife

CCTool

CCTool

Magpi Magazine

Magpi Magazine Free Rasberry Pi Magazine

Battery Recondition

Battery Recondition

Arduino

Ultracaps

YT Subscribe

Gravity Machines

Tesla-Ebook

Magnet Secrets

Lindemann Video

Navigation

Products

Statistics

  • *Total Members: 82440
  • *Latest: radiantz

  • *Total Posts: 499740
  • *Total Topics: 14718
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 10
  • *Guests: 208
  • *Total: 218

Facebook

Author Topic: Pierre's 170W in 1600W out Looped Very impressive Build continued & moderated  (Read 64794 times)

Offline onielsen

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 21
I made the attached gif animation of how I believe the fields are switched.

Regards
Ole

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy


Offline Jeg

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1173
Hi Jeg,

I have given up on the L298N boards, as soon as you increase current much over 4A I had multiple failures.

I have a BTS7960 twin bridge board on order for evaluation, but I have decided to now go with the relay boards until I can get an understanding of exactly how the recovery diodes are working, connected as Pierre has them. It looks like the current path is from ground via the remaining series coils in the group, though the coil that's been turned off then up through the diode on that side.
I would be reluctant to remove the lower diodes on a half bridge.

I went with 1000V 10A fast diodes for recovery.

Regards

L192

Thanks L192. Even it is wise to use the original Pierre's gear, i am still thinking the diy bridge solution. Especially now with this current limit report of yours. 

Offline ARTMOSART

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 15
bonjour à tous ,

Merci Pierre pour les dernières informations  ,et bonne continuation pour ton nouveau prototype .

Variation du champ magnétique et intensité ?

que pensez vous de créer deux fois six pole magnétique ,en utilisant deux set de 18 bobines puis de faire tourner 6 pole dans le

 sens horlogique et  les 6 autres dans le sens anti-horlogique .ainsi le rotor verra le flux magnétique s'intensifier en un temps réduit

cordialement ,Mosha

EN/Hello everyone , Thank you Pierre for the latest information, and good luck for your new prototype.
 Magnetic field variation and intensity?
 what do you think of creating twice six magnetic pole, using two sets of 18 coils and then spin 6 pole in the  clockwise sense and the other six in the anti-clockwise direction. thus the rotor will see the magnetic flux intensify in a reduced time

 best regards, Mosha

Online jerdee

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 15
I made the attached gif animation of how I believe the fields are switched.

Regards
Ole

You are on the right track!!  If you don't flip the polarity, you don't have a stronger AC field.  When we think of a normal AC generator with Pierre's normal known code.  We can split the code in half to reverse the polarity of the coils.  Pierre's uses 24 cycles in his code, LUC is using 20 cycles.  This means for a 30 pole generator you'll have 10 cycles for the north in one polarity, and 10 cycles of the south in the other polarity.  This is why you see his videos cycle every other relay!  You have to switch the field's direction to generate real power!  We've only been testing in one direction.

I've sent code to LUC that supports this plan..and set the sequence back to what was originally given with Pierre.  His code is correct, just changed to the 20 cycles (30 poles) instead of 24 cycles(36 poles).  I've kept the wait 1 and wait 2 for his PWM control.  But you'll see the two highs at the top, and the two lows at the bottom of the code, same as the audio that I investigated earlier.

Basically, taking the second half of the code or half wave and flipping polarity.  Very similar to the concept Luc tried with shorter delays in the second half of the cycle and got interesting results.  I think this is our MAJOR clue to work with these switches.

JerDee

Fr. Tu es sur la bonne piste!! Si vous n'inversez pas la polarité, vous n'avez pas de champ AC plus fort. Quand on pense à un générateur AC normal avec le code connu de Pierre. Nous pouvons diviser le code en deux pour inverser la polarité des bobines. Pierre utilise 24 cycles dans son code, LUC utilise 20 cycles. Cela signifie que pour un générateur de 30 pôles, vous aurez 10 cycles pour le nord dans une polarité, et 10 cycles du sud dans l'autre polarité. C'est pourquoi vous voyez dans les vidéos de Pierre un cycle sur tous les autres relais! Vous devez changer la direction du champ pour générer de la puissance réelle! Nous avons seulement testé dans une direction.

J'ai envoyé un code à LUC qui soutient ce plan ... et j'ai ramené la séquence à ce qui avait été donné à l'origine de Pierre. Son code est correct, juste changé pour les 20 cycles (30 pôles) au lieu de 24 cycles (36 pôles). J'ai gardé l'attente 1 et attendre 2 pour son contrôle PWM. Mais vous verrez les deux hauts en haut, et les deux bas en bas du code, comme dans le son audio que j'ai étudié plus tôt.

Fondamentalement, en prenant la deuxième moitié du code ou demi-onde et inversion de polarité. Très similaire au concept que Luc a essayé avec des retards plus courts dans la seconde moitié du cycle et obtenu des résultats intéressants. Je pense que c'est notre indice MAJEUR pour travailler avec ces commutateurs.

JerDee
« Last Edit: April 19, 2018, 03:44:11 PM by gotoluc »

Online listener192

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 45
I made the attached gif animation of how I believe the fields are switched.

Regards
Ole

Hi Ole,

your animation doesn't run. You may have to zip it and post it.

Regards

L192

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Sponsored links:




Online listener192

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 45
You are on the right track!!  If you don't flip the polarity, you don't have a stronger AC field.  When we think of a normal AC generator with Pierre's normal known code.  We can split the code in half to reverse the polarity of the coils.  Pierre's uses 24 cycles in his code, LUC is using 20 cycles.  This means for a 30 pole generator you'll have 10 cycles for the north in one polarity, and 10 cycles of the south in the other polarity.  This is why you see his videos cycle every other relay!  You have to switch the field's direction to generate real power!  We've only been testing in one direction.

I've sent code to LUC that supports this plan..and set the sequence back to what was originally given with Pierre.  His code is correct, just changed to the 20 cycles (30 poles) instead of 24 cycles(36 poles).  I've kept the wait 1 and wait 2 for his PWM control.  But you'll see the two highs at the top, and the two lows at the bottom of the code, same as the audio that I investigated earlier.

Basically, taking the second half of the code or half wave and flipping polarity.  Very similar to the concept Luc tried with shorter delays in the second half of the cycle and got interesting results.  I think this is our MAJOR clue to work with these switches.

JerDee

Fr. Tu es sur la bonne piste!! Si vous n'inversez pas la polarité, vous n'avez pas de champ AC plus fort. Quand on pense à un générateur AC normal avec le code connu de Pierre. Nous pouvons diviser le code en deux pour inverser la polarité des bobines. Pierre utilise 24 cycles dans son code, LUC utilise 20 cycles. Cela signifie que pour un générateur de 30 pôles, vous aurez 10 cycles pour le nord dans une polarité, et 10 cycles du sud dans l'autre polarité. C'est pourquoi vous voyez dans les vidéos de Pierre un cycle sur tous les autres relais! Vous devez changer la direction du champ pour générer de la puissance réelle! Nous avons seulement testé dans une direction.

J'ai envoyé un code à LUC qui soutient ce plan ... et j'ai ramené la séquence à ce qui avait été donné à l'origine de Pierre. Son code est correct, juste changé pour les 20 cycles (30 pôles) au lieu de 24 cycles (36 pôles). J'ai gardé l'attente 1 et attendre 2 pour son contrôle PWM. Mais vous verrez les deux hauts en haut, et les deux bas en bas du code, comme dans le son audio que j'ai étudié plus tôt.

Fondamentalement, en prenant la deuxième moitié du code ou demi-onde et inversion de polarité. Très similaire au concept que Luc a essayé avec des retards plus courts dans la seconde moitié du cycle et obtenu des résultats intéressants. Je pense que c'est notre indice MAJEUR pour travailler avec ces commutateurs.

JerDee


So that would mean north south sine like wave in the rotor followed every 180 degrees by a square wave when you flip the poles then followed by a sine wave?

L192
« Last Edit: April 19, 2018, 03:48:21 PM by gotoluc »

Online listener192

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 45
Thanks L192. Even it is wise to use the original Pierre's gear, i am still thinking the diy bridge solution. Especially now with this current limit report of yours.


My rotor cover 9 poles, so I am thinking of cutting off 1.5 poles width either side both ends so only a 6 pole width presents to the stator. Ideally I would like 5 but I can't remove that much.

I believe I am losing  a lot of MMF, as this  rotor was designed to sweep a distributed alternator stator phase winding that had a greater pole pitch, which makes sense, as 9 x 3 =27 so the rotor spans a phase with a single pole gap between each of the three phases.

My waveform was not as good as Gotoluc's and although our coil pitches are one slot different that doesn't explain what look like stator pole reversals.

All of the coils have had in-situ checks with a flux probe, so no I don't have coils reversed.

L192

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Sponsored links:




Online listener192

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 45
Have discovered something on my rotor, don't know why I did not see it straight away.

There are two ceramic magnets let into the rotor faces.

These set up an initial field to get the alternator generating output. They are detrimental to our operation, as our flux will be reversing poles.

I removed these and have seen an improvement in output and symmetry , as you would expect. It does leave a 13mm x 30mm x5mm deep slot, that will increase the overall reluctance of the rotor, which is unfortunate. It may be possible to plug the slot with a piece that I am planning to cut of the ends to shorten the face to 6 poles.

This may also explain the strange reversals in the pulse waveforms that I was getting. Unfortunately until my relays arrive, I cannot run a full set of switches.

 

Regards

L192

Offline gotoluc

  • Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3004
Yes, you have to remove those magnets when using a Generator rotors. Those magnets are to start up the magnetization of the stator in most AC generators.
There's a product called Devcon which is a 2 part Iron resin.

Devcon video demo: https://youtu.be/zQXxdtki-x8

Online listener192

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 45
Yes, you have to remove those magnets when using a Generator rotors. Those magnets are to start up the magnetization of the stator in most AC generators.
There's a product called Devcon which is a 2 part Iron resin.

Devcon video demo: https://youtu.be/zQXxdtki-x8

Hi Gotoluc,

Thanks for the video.

Regards

L192

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Sponsored links:




Offline gotoluc

  • Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3004
Well people are free to experiment with other configurations i they wish but I intend to stick with Pierre's original scheme, on the basis that it was shown to work and an understanding  of how it works is the easiest path to further development, as there are too many variables otherwise.

Regards
L192

I agree L192,
Pierre has laid the foundations and gave away what needs to be achieved:  http://overunity.com/17653/pierres-170w-in-1600w-out-looped-very-impressive-build-continued-moderated/msg520075/#msg520075

Since then, there's 2 pages added of discussions which are not related to what Pierre has just shared. Why?... Pierre must be in disbelief of what's going on with people here when he just gave it all away.... if you ask me, that's disrespectful and insulting.
I'm going to go through those 2 pages now and will delete anything that's not related to what Pierre has just shared. There's been more than enough discussion of all kinds of possibilities and enough is enough.

Regards
Luc

Fr.  Je suis d'accord L192,
Pierre vient de donner les bases de ce qui doit être réalisé: http://overunity.com/17653/pierres-170w-in-1600w-out-looped-very-impressive-build-continued-moderated/msg520075/#msg520075
Depuis, il y a 2 pages de discussions qui ne sont pas liées à ce que Pierre vient de partager. Pourquoi? ... Pierre doit être incrédule de ce qui se passe avec les gens ici quand il vient de tout donner ... si vous me demandez, c'est irrespectueux et insultant.
Je vais maintenant parcourir ces deux pages et je vais supprimer tout ce qui n'est pas lié à ce que Pierre vient de partager. Il y a eu plus que suffisamment de discussions sur toutes sortes de possibilités et assez c'est assez.
Cordialement
Luc

Offline dhodge

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 1
Hi All,
I have been watching this with great interest but a few basic things don’t make sense to me, there is probably a simple answer but I need to ask the questions.
1. If there is a 4 ohm resistor in series with the transformer which then charges the supercapacitors assuming 24V DC after the rectifier should give 6A on the DC, which would be approx 1.5A on the 100V line.
If there is 2.5A in the primary then I would assume that there is 10A in the secondary of the transformer and this then does not make sense with a 4 ohm resistor.
I am sure there is a reason for this, but it is bugging me.

I am working on assembling the parts and have come to the conclusion that if each coil is driven by an H Bridge then it is possible to cover all options of coil connections using the H Bridges, if the coils are connected in series then you would get different currents in them depending on how they are switched as you would end up with coils in series which would effectively alter the resistance and therefor the current.
Connecting H Bridges in place of the relays will cause issues due to the freewheel diodes.

Would the recovery system work much better if high frequencies were used.


Offline gotoluc

  • Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3004
Hi All,
I have been watching this with great interest but a few basic things don’t make sense to me, there is probably a simple answer but I need to ask the questions.
1. If there is a 4 ohm resistor in series with the transformer which then charges the supercapacitors assuming 24V DC after the rectifier should give 6A on the DC, which would be approx 1.5A on the 100V line.
If there is 2.5A in the primary then I would assume that there is 10A in the secondary of the transformer and this then does not make sense with a 4 ohm resistor.
I am sure there is a reason for this, but it is bugging me.

I am working on assembling the parts and have come to the conclusion that if each coil is driven by an H Bridge then it is possible to cover all options of coil connections using the H Bridges, if the coils are connected in series then you would get different currents in them depending on how they are switched as you would end up with coils in series which would effectively alter the resistance and therefor the current.
Connecting H Bridges in place of the relays will cause issues due to the freewheel diodes.

Would the recovery system work much better if high frequencies were used.

Welcome dhodge,
I just approved your first post. However, this topic is more for the builders. Probably what you're asking about has been covered in the first topic which is still viewable to the public. Please search there for possible answers to your questions: http://overunity.com/17609/170-watts-in-1600-watts-out-looped-very-impressive-build-and-video/#.Wtj8ftYpDM0
Once you're convinced and you decide you want to build a test device then please post a video of your progress and feel free to participate here.
I'm sure you understand we cannot stop our research every time someone asks questions that have probably been covered.
Kind regards
Luc

Fr. 
Bienvenue dhodge,
Je viens d'approuver votre premier post. Cependant, ce sujet est plus pour les constructeurs. Probablement ce que vous demandez a été couvert dans le premier sujet qui est encore visible au public. S'il vous plaît chercher là pour des réponses à vos questions: http://overunity.com/17609/170-watts-in-1600-watts-out-looped-very-impressive-build-and-video/#.Wtj8ftYpDM0
Une fois que vous êtes convaincu et que vous décidez que vous voulez construire un appareil de test alors s'il vous plaît poster une vidéo de vos progrès et n'hésitez pas à participer ici.
Je suis sûr que vous comprenez que nous ne pouvons pas arrêter notre recherche chaque fois que quelqu'un pose des questions qui ont probablement été couvertes.
Sincères amitiés
Luc

Online jerdee

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 15

So that would mean north south sine like wave in the rotor followed every 180 degrees by a square wave when you flip the poles then followed by a sine wave?

L192


Nope, Each half the code is changing polarity in succession. 5 poles = 60 degrees or one half the code cycle, while Pierre's is 6 poles.
E.g.
HBridge 1-5 is North, next
HBridge 6-10 become South, then FULL off position to collect, this is the double off position, and is seen on Pierre's scope shot.  This is the inductive kickback from the coils and load.
The other two 120 degrees are doing this at the same time.
You always maintain an opposite field at 180 degrees.  You have to have this for an AC output!


The code is running in a repeat loop at 120 degrees with a small rest period before repeating back to the start.
Every 60 degrees the polarity is switching, again this is each half of the code. 
The code is working only at 120 degrees repeating back to 0 degrees.


GotoLuc, is only doing one half of the correct switching, He is not getting a strong polarity of NS across the load!  Swing the last half of the code...and I believe we have something special.  A much stronger potential across the load.


What does a magnet do to the current flow when it shifts from N to S?  Without current flow moving back and forth, you have a very weak AC generator output, right?  Easy questions, just proving a point. :)


Jerdee 




Offline onielsen

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 21
Quote
Hi Ole,

your animation doesn't run. You may have to zip it and post it.

Regards

L192
Hi L192,

I attach it again. But this time it is a video file (.mp4). I hope this will work as it looks like only the first frame of the animated gif went through. The .mp4 file size is only a fraction of the animated gif file size. Put on repeat mode in the video viewer to see it loop like the original gif-file.

Regards
Ole

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy


 

Share this topic to your favourite Social and Bookmark site

Please SHARE this topic at:


OneLink