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 Posts: 499837
  • *Total Topics: 14720
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 7
  • *Guests: 213
  • *Total: 220

Facebook

Author Topic: Pierre's 170W in 1600W out Looped Very impressive Build continued & moderated  (Read 67933 times)

Offline gotoluc

  • Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3005
Hello Luc,

did I miss something ; can you explain to me how is ordered the closing of the contact (green arrow) which allows the passage of the negative current?
Thank you

FR
Bonjour Luc,

j'ai loupé quelque chose ; pouvez-vous m'expliquer comment est commandée la fermeture du contact (flèche verte) qui permet le passage du courant négatif ?
Merci

Hello MichelM, please see the below drawing to understand how the coils are powered and connected.

Fr. Bonjour MichelM, s'il vous plaît voir le dessin ci-dessous pour comprendre comment les bobines sont alimentées et connectées.


Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy


Offline gotoluc

  • Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3005
I received the below private message from MileHigh which I'm posting since it's content is participative.
@MileHigh, I think you can post in this topic but your post would only be visible once I approve them and could end up not being seen. So you can PM me and I'll post what is informative or constructive.

From MH
Listener191 put up a hand sketch in post #458 and better drawing in post #465 that shows the flux cancellation problems with overlapping north-south contiguous sets of 5+5 coils and then he proposes a "solution" by separating the north and south sets of coils far apart so that they don't "interfere" with each other.
 
 But the problem is that with even the separation you still get massive amounts of flux cancellation.
 
 Listener in his new diagram thinks a 3-slot pitch coil configuration looks like this:
 
 NNN
 _NNN
 __NNN
 
 And he thinks that that all looks "additive" and solves the flux cancellation problem.
 
 But the reality is that this is false.
 
 Let's look at a single 3-slot pitch coil and a single 5-slot pitch coil:
 
 Do they look like this?
 
 _NNN_
 _NNNNN_
 
 The answer is NO, they look like this:
 
 ...SSSSSNNNSSSSS...
 ...SSSSSNNNNNSSSSS...
 
 On either side of each "north" coil you have SOUTH.   And that will cancel out some of the flux on both sides.
 
 So here is what a 5-slot pitch "solution" looks like just for one polarity:
 
 SSSSSNNNNNSSSSS
 _SSSSSNNNNNSSSSS
 __SSSSSNNNNNSSSSS
 ___SSSSSNNNNNSSSSS
 ____SSSSSNNNNNSSSSS
 
 Then on top of that, what about all of the net flux generated in the stator that is not lined up with the stationary rotor?
 
 It doesn't really have a nice return path to complete the flux loop, does it?  On either side of the coils in the stator there is air, and air sucks for conducting the magnetic flux.  The vast majority of the flux is going to complete the loop inside the metal of the stator itself.  That means some of the flux is not going to be "nice" and it is going to "punch though" the stator in the opposite direction that you think it should be going in because it has to loop back around the coil somehow.  And that means even more flux cancellation will be taking place because there is no proper magnetic circuit to channel the flux in a proper loop.
 
 It's a double-whammy mess.

Online listener192

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 62
I received the below private message from MileHigh which I'm posting since it's content is participative.
@MileHigh, I think you can post in this topic but your post would only be visible once I approve it and could end up not being seen. So you can PM me and I'll post what is informative or constructive.

From MH
Listener191 put up a hand sketch in post #458 and better drawing in post #465 that shows the flux cancellation problems with overlapping north-south contiguous sets of 5+5 coils and then he proposes a "solution" by separating the north and south sets of coils far apart so that they don't "interfere" with each other.
 
 But the problem is that with even the separation you still get massive amounts of flux cancellation.
 
 Listener in his new diagram thinks a 3-slot pitch coil configuration looks like this:
 
 NNN
 _NNN
 __NNN
 
 And he thinks that that all looks "additive" and solves the flux cancellation problem.
 
 But the reality is that this is false.
 
 Let's look at a single 3-slot pitch coil and a single 5-slot pitch coil:
 
 Do they look like this?
 
 _NNN_
 _NNNNN_
 
 The answer is NO, they look like this:
 
 ...SSSSSNNNSSSSS...
 ...SSSSSNNNNNSSSSS...
 
 On either side of each "north" coil you have SOUTH.   And that will cancel out some of the flux on both sides.
 
 So here is what a 5-slot pitch "solution" looks like just for one polarity:
 
 SSSSSNNNNNSSSSS
 _SSSSSNNNNNSSSSS
 __SSSSSNNNNNSSSSS
 ___SSSSSNNNNNSSSSS
 ____SSSSSNNNNNSSSSS
 
 Then on top of that, what about all of the net flux generated in the stator that is not lined up with the stationary rotor?
 
 It doesn't really have a nice return path to complete the flux loop, does it?  On either side of the coils in the stator there is air, and air sucks for conducting the magnetic flux.  The vast majority of the flux is going to complete the loop inside the metal of the stator itself.  That means some of the flux is not going to be "nice" and it is going to "punch though" the stator in the opposite direction that you think it should be going in because it has to loop back around the coil somehow.  And that means even more flux cancellation will be taking place because there is no proper magnetic circuit to channel the flux in a proper loop.
 
 It's a double-whammy mess.

Yes he is correct about the stator poles coupling to the back stator either side of the pole group however, this situation changes when the rotor is in registration with a pole as the rotor then offers a lower reluctance path across to the opposite polarity pole.

L192

Offline ARTMOSART

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 15
The below are two new messages I received from Pierre after he viewed my last French video.
Fr.  Ci-dessous son deux nouveaux messages que jai reçus de Pierre après avoir vu ma dernière vidéo française.

Yes, I know that 6 pole without current variation does not give much but my device has a variation of current. Congratulations you just discovered one of my secret. There still remains more to discover, then you will see the performance I achieved. And yes, there is really 6 field that rotate, except, there really is a variation which you need to know how to do so you can vary the coils. It may be possible that your configuration can achieve it but I'm not sure of your configuration, you will need to experiment. One thing is sure, if you had 5 pole it will not work. You see, you start to find solutions to the problems.

Sorry, I had left you a quick message since I was not home. Yes you can make a fluctuation between the field while having 6 magnetic field and can be all done in series. I was able to do it it. There are several ways to do it and you could have done it with only 2 pole in series, 1 north and 1 south with all coils on.
I would of needed to considerably increased the speed but with relays it is not possible. You can do it as you want but it is one of the conditions to get overunity.
You still have one solution to find but the basis is to have a good rotation of the field, a north at one end of the rotor and a south to the other side and a variation of current if you want a maximum of amperage and it's better kept all the coils in series in this configuration but you really are on the right track. Now I understand why you did not have much output with the program that I saw. Everything is explainable. Have a good day

Fr.  Oui, je sait que 6 pole sans variation de courant ne donne pas grand chose, mais moi j'ai une variation de courant. Félicitations tu vient de découvrir un de mes secret. Il en reste encore un peut  a devouvrir et tu va avoir le performance que j'ai fait. Mais oui, il y a vraiment 6 champ qui tourne sauf qu'il y a bien une variation, suffit de savoir comment faire pour varier les bobines. Il se peut que ta configuration faisse le travail mais je ne suis pas sure de ta configuration, tu peut experimenter. Une chose est sûre, si tu avait 5 pole cela ne fonctionnera pas tu voit, tu commence à trouver des solution au problème.

Fr.  Bon désolé, je t'ai laisser un message rapidement mais je n'était pas chez moi. Oui tu peut faire une fluctuation entre les champ en ayant 6 champ magnétique et tu peut faire toute en série. Je l'ai fait. Il y a plusieurs façon de faire et tu aurait pu faire avec seulement 2 pole en série 1 nord et 1 sud et toute les bobine allumée.
J'aurais du considérablement augmenté la vitesse, mais avec des relais ce n'était pas possible. Tu peut le faire comme tu le veut mais c'est l'une des condition pour faire un overunity.
Il te reste qu'une solution a trouver, mais la base est de bien faire tourner le champ, un nord a une extrémité du rotor et un sud a l'autre coté et une variation de courant si tu veut un maximum d'ampérage et vaut mieux resté en série pour toute les bobine dans cette configuration mais tu est vraiment sur la bonne voie. Maintenant je comprend pourquoi tu n'avait pas grand chose a la sortie avec le program que j'ai vue. Tout s'explique.  bonne journée

Hi,
FR/
variation du flux magnétique ?
je pense qu'il y'a déjà une variation du flux du au fait de cour circuiter 1/5 bobine soit 20%. c'est peut être pas suffisant et qu'il
faudrait simplement en courcircuiter  2 à 3 bobine à la fois ca va permettre une augmentation du courant dans les autres bobines
qu'en penser vous ?

cordialement ,Mosha

ENvariation of the magnetic flux? I think there is already a variation in the flow of the fact of running circuit 1/5 coil or 20%. it may not be enough and we should simply short  2 to 3 coil at a time it will allow an increase in the current in the other coils
 what do you think?

 






Online listener192

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 62
Hello, I am following this thread from the beginning. I was very impressed by Pierre generator. Very professional thread, all which are involved here have a lot of experience in these issues.
All my respect to Luc, his prototype is very impressive and expensive.
I am not an expert, not even a professional, I am more like an amator.
I want share with my point of view, because I know that if you focus too much to one idea, you miss other solutions.
From my point of amator view, there no 30/36 coils energized all time, as you Luc mentioned in the last video. I believe that only the coils which are energized are exactly the coils where the LEDs are on. When led is off, the coils not energized anymore, allowing bemf to go to caps. If all coils are energized, how bemf can take place?
I believe like this: all the time is on three coils from stator and Pierre made the "rotor" with a certain number of turns like in a normal transformer. So all the time only 3 coils are inducing the current to the rotor.
Again, I am just an amator, please ignore if this is wrong.

Cheers!
Alex

Hi Alex,

There is a rotary pattern of poles with a distributed  amplitude of MMF however, you are correct, I have measured no coil recovery current from any of the half bridges in operation, as no coil actually turns off. We are missing something that Pierre has not shared.

Regards

L192

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Sponsored links:




Online listener192

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 62
The below are two new messages I received from Pierre after he viewed my last French video.
Fr.  Ci-dessous son deux nouveaux messages que jai reçus de Pierre après avoir vu ma dernière vidéo française.

Yes, I know that 6 pole without current variation does not give much but my device has a variation of current. Congratulations you just discovered one of my secret. There still remains more to discover, then you will see the performance I achieved. And yes, there is really 6 field that rotate, except, there really is a variation which you need to know how to do so you can vary the coils. It may be possible that your configuration can achieve it but I'm not sure of your configuration, you will need to experiment. One thing is sure, if you had 5 pole it will not work. You see, you start to find solutions to the problems.

Sorry, I had left you a quick message since I was not home. Yes you can make a fluctuation between the field while having 6 magnetic field and can be all done in series. I was able to do it it. There are several ways to do it and you could have done it with only 2 pole in series, 1 north and 1 south with all coils on.
I would of needed to considerably increased the speed but with relays it is not possible. You can do it as you want but it is one of the conditions to get overunity.
You still have one solution to find but the basis is to have a good rotation of the field, a north at one end of the rotor and a south to the other side and a variation of current if you want a maximum of amperage and it's better kept all the coils in series in this configuration but you really are on the right track. Now I understand why you did not have much output with the program that I saw. Everything is explainable. Have a good day

Fr.  Oui, je sait que 6 pole sans variation de courant ne donne pas grand chose, mais moi j'ai une variation de courant. Félicitations tu vient de découvrir un de mes secret. Il en reste encore un peut  a devouvrir et tu va avoir le performance que j'ai fait. Mais oui, il y a vraiment 6 champ qui tourne sauf qu'il y a bien une variation, suffit de savoir comment faire pour varier les bobines. Il se peut que ta configuration faisse le travail mais je ne suis pas sure de ta configuration, tu peut experimenter. Une chose est sûre, si tu avait 5 pole cela ne fonctionnera pas tu voit, tu commence à trouver des solution au problème.

Fr.  Bon désolé, je t'ai laisser un message rapidement mais je n'était pas chez moi. Oui tu peut faire une fluctuation entre les champ en ayant 6 champ magnétique et tu peut faire toute en série. Je l'ai fait. Il y a plusieurs façon de faire et tu aurait pu faire avec seulement 2 pole en série 1 nord et 1 sud et toute les bobine allumée.
J'aurais du considérablement augmenté la vitesse, mais avec des relais ce n'était pas possible. Tu peut le faire comme tu le veut mais c'est l'une des condition pour faire un overunity.
Il te reste qu'une solution a trouver, mais la base est de bien faire tourner le champ, un nord a une extrémité du rotor et un sud a l'autre coté et une variation de courant si tu veut un maximum d'ampérage et vaut mieux resté en série pour toute les bobine dans cette configuration mais tu est vraiment sur la bonne voie. Maintenant je comprend pourquoi tu n'avait pas grand chose a la sortie avec le program que j'ai vue. Tout s'explique.  bonne journée


The easiest way to vary the current through all of the coils is with PWM.

We are generating a travelling wave via the rotating poles lets say at 10Hz, then via PWM we superimpose 60Hz on top of the 10Hz wave?



L192

Offline seaad

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 159
Just a repetition from my post in energeticforum:
I come to think of this when I reed Pierres last letter.
Part of the Figuera patent.

A)
(pat.1908) " circulates a proper current, which is taken from one foreign
origin into one or more electromagnets, magnetize one or more
electromagnets"

" and while the current is higher or lower the magnetization of
the electromagnets ((one or more)) is decreasing or increasing and varying
"

decreasing or increasing and varying

B)
(pat.1914) " but in no case is there any communication between the induced coil
and the inductor coil "

C)
(pat.1914) " and we will collect from these induced ((y)) the resulting
phenomena experienced from those inductors. ((N, S)) "


Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Sponsored links:




Offline gotoluc

  • Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3005
Hi,
FR/
variation du flux magnétique ?
je pense qu'il y'a déjà une variation du flux du au fait de cour circuiter 1/5 bobine soit 20%. c'est peut être pas suffisant et qu'il
faudrait simplement en courcircuiter  2 à 3 bobine à la fois ca va permettre une augmentation du courant dans les autres bobines
qu'en penser vous ?

cordialement ,Mosha

ENvariation of the magnetic flux? I think there is already a variation in the flow of the fact of running circuit 1/5 coil or 20%. it may not be enough and we should simply short  2 to 3 coil at a time it will allow an increase in the current in the other coils
 what do you think?

Oui, Mosha, c'est un très bon point et un moyen possible qui doit être pris en considération.
De plus, le programme original de Pierre qu'il m'a envoyé contenait un petit problème qui a été corrigé par PmgR et peut-être d'autres. Cependant, nous devrions considérer cela comme un indice possible et non comme une erreur de la part de Pierre.
Merci d'avoir porté cela à notre attention.
Nous avons beaucoup de bons esprits ici et en travaillant ensemble, nous serons en mesure de résoudre chaque problème au fur et à mesure.
Cordialement
Luc

Eng. Yes, Mosha, that is very good point and a possible way which needs consideration.
Also, Pierre's original program he sent me contained a glitch of some kind which was corrected by PmgR and maybe others. However, we should be looking at this as a possible hint and not an error on Pierre's part.
Thank you for bringing this to our attention.
We have a lot of good minds here and by working together we will be able to solve each issue as they come.
Regards
Luc

Offline Jeg

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1176

The easiest way to vary the current through all of the coils is with PWM.

We are generating a travelling wave via the rotating poles lets say at 10Hz, then via PWM we superimpose 60Hz on top of the 10Hz wave?



L192

The other way around. We have to build a low frequency with the help of a high frequency switching. The sketch needs a variable to be set so to increase the "on" time of the pulse, coil after coil and then back again to 50% for a full cycle. It is easy i guess but first lets solve the overlapping problem. Looks like Pierre's new topology solves this issue and still keeps the uniformity all around the stator.

 

Offline gotoluc

  • Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3005
Another very important variation we need to consider when using Solid State vs Relay switching is, we know Pierre is pushing his relays to their mechanical limits and he has said many times he would like to even go to higher frequencies but the relays can't handle it.
So the reality is, when pushing a relay to its mechanical limit you get to a point that even though you program tells the relay to stay on for x amount of time, it actually does much less. So when using solid state components which does not suffer from this issue (time reduction) we need to consider this.  So we should have the ability to reduce duty cycle (on time) and overlap time to tune the device's input power and overall efficiency.

Regards
Luc

Fr.  Une autre variation très importante que nous devons prendre en compte lors de l'utilisation de la commutation Solid State vs Relay est que nous savons que Pierre pousse ses relais à leurs limites mécaniques et il aimerait même aller à des fréquences plus élevées mais les relais ne peuvent pas le gérer.
Donc, en réalité, lorsque vous augmentez un relais à sa limite mécanique, vous arrivez à un point où, même si vous programmez le relais pour qu'il reste allumé pendant x temps, il en fait beaucoup moins. Donc, lorsque vous utilisez des composants à l'état solide qui ne souffre pas de ce problème (réductiont de temps), alors nous devons considérer cela et devrions avoir la possibilité de réduire le cycle de service (à temps) et le temps de chevauchement pour régler la puissance d'entrée de l'appareil et l'efficacité globale
Cordialement
Luc

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Sponsored links:




Offline pmgr

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 115
    • Stop organ harvesting from Falun Gong practitioners
The other way around. We have to build a low frequency with the help of a high frequency switching. The sketch needs a variable to be set so to increase the "on" time of the pulse, coil after coil and then back again to 50% for a full cycle. It is easy i guess but first lets solve the overlapping problem. Looks like Pierre's new topology solves this issue and still keeps the uniformity all around the stator.
Indeed, Luc, upload the potentiometer sketch to the Arduino and put the rotary magnet back in, start at a low frequency, get the magnet spinning and then turn up the frequency to see what happens.
PmgR

Offline konehead

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 416
Hi Everyone
Why no backemf/recoil recovery steering diodes on each relay or H bridge switch???????
This energy is being totally disregarded and shoved into garbage can, like most electrical engineers with the proper schooling will do.

Again I mention Pierre said plain as day in Luc's video that the "coil return" (he calls it) is the secret!!!
Why not take what he points out as truth??

That backemf/recoil energy is very much stronger with mechanical switching since such low resistance to the switching....also note that you place steering diodes on the SWITCH, not really the inductor - the energy "comes" from the switch you could say.

So there is that point I want to make the other point maybe even more important (maybe not)

Lets say you shove that magnet wire up through slot 1 and down through slot 6....now you have created an electromagnets of that distance through the stator poles, N one end, S other for example....
So very simple.
Now what about all the winds in between 1 and 6?
They all become INDDUCED  PICKUP WINDS (sharing common core) and they will for sure make lots and lots of power especially all combined together too....
BUT will only "make" this power if you put DIODES on those winds and guide this energy into a cap bank for example where to put it (what Pierre does!)
No diodes, you will see nothing!
My personal perhaps warped opinion is that THIS is where the huge amount of energy produced in Pierres DZ generator comes from (my theory sorry)
Pulse one coil - induce 4 or 5 in
concsequence but it is not a consequence it is a reinforcement of energy created  and this energy fills up the cap  bank, keeps it looping with no more input, once you also pre0charge the cap bank.
ALSO
There is a "combination" (coherence as Ole will call it) of the induced pickup winds, and the backemf/recoil/flyback energy - this makes the caps fill up even faster....
Anyways in conclusion it looks like to me the diodes are being completely ignored in Pierre's build, and I will guess everyone is thinking the internal diodes in the H-bridges are doing this work, but actually they will not do shit (sorry) they are only there to be a protection mechanism, not a steering mechanism of this energy....
Try to pull out the backemf/recoil with any transistor or mosfet without some fast steering diodes guiding into caps....
Try tp put any emergy into caps with induced pickup winds that share common core with primary pulse??
All will be fruitless without the diodes into caps.



Offline seaad

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 159
72 diodes connected Only to + and somewhere ?   (72 relays, 36 coils)

And middle connections without labels  35 empty 36 = one single point between two coils and two relays with TWO diodes in parallel ??
How are the diodes connected on the Arduino compared with Pierres connections?

Offline gotoluc

  • Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3005
Hi Everyone
Why no backemf/recoil recovery steering diodes on each relay or H bridge switch? ??? ???
This energy is being totally disregarded and shoved into garbage can, like most electrical engineers with the proper schooling will do.

Again I mention Pierre said plain as day in Luc's video that the "coil return" (he calls it) is the secret!!!
Why not take what he points out as truth??

That backemf/recoil energy is very much stronger with mechanical switching since such low resistance to the switching....also note that you place steering diodes on the SWITCH, not really the inductor - the energy "comes" from the switch you could say.

So there is that point I want to make the other point maybe even more important (maybe not)

Lets say you shove that magnet wire up through slot 1 and down through slot 6....now you have created an electromagnets of that distance through the stator poles, N one end, S other for example....
So very simple.
Now what about all the winds in between 1 and 6?
They all become INDDUCED  PICKUP WINDS (sharing common core) and they will for sure make lots and lots of power especially all combined together too....
BUT will only "make" this power if you put DIODES on those winds and guide this energy into a cap bank for example where to put it (what Pierre does!)
No diodes, you will see nothing!
My personal perhaps warped opinion is that THIS is where the huge amount of energy produced in Pierres DZ generator comes from (my theory sorry)
Pulse one coil - induce 4 or 5 in
concsequence but it is not a consequence it is a reinforcement of energy created  and this energy fills up the cap  bank, keeps it looping with no more input, once you also pre0charge the cap bank.
ALSO
There is a "combination" (coherence as Ole will call it) of the induced pickup winds, and the backemf/recoil/flyback energy - this makes the caps fill up even faster....
Anyways in conclusion it looks like to me the diodes are being completely ignored in Pierre's build, and I will guess everyone is thinking the internal diodes in the H-bridges are doing this work, but actually they will not do shit (sorry) they are only there to be a protection mechanism, not a steering mechanism of this energy....
Try to pull out the backemf/recoil with any transistor or mosfet without some fast steering diodes guiding into caps....
Try tp put any emergy into caps with induced pickup winds that share common core with primary pulse??
All will be fruitless without the diodes into caps.

Hi konehead,

My test device collects all the coils return (inductive discharge) back into my 5 Farad super capacitor power rails.
You can see the current return from the current probe in this video which I made for programing but hasn't been shared yet.
The return may represent about 30% of the input power. However, my output coil sucks, maybe 1 or 2% of the input power.
We don't yet know of or understand all of Pierre's secrets.
Looking forward to seeing your test results and device.
Regards
Luc

Video Link: https://youtu.be/SSKH8qmb5VQ

Offline gmolina

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 7
Hi Luc, in my understanding of this device, you need first magnetize the core and after them sustain this with much little requeriments of energy, for that reason the field can't be detroyed, because if you destroy the field destroy the core magnetization, in Pierre video when he connect power supply to the arduino, begin first one initial sequence (i suppose that is for the core magnetization) and after that the working sequence well knowed.

Regards,

GM

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