Hello all. I was wondering, not too long ago I found this page http://www.inkomp-delta.com/ and on it is a Meg alike system shown.
There is also a YouTube video, it is a bit different then the one on their own page. The device seems to be enclosed in this bigger control box.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=npFVaeSbk1Q&feature=related

Now it all look very promising, in the video it seems the thing is past a Cop of 2...,and it indeed is a surprisingly fresh and 'new' way of doing this 'permanent magnet switching'. See the attached photo's (Or the one on their page) they have these 'toroid' (close looped) input core sections which will function as a 'magnetic resistor' once magnetized/saturated. And so the flux form the magnet will have to find another way around. Now we all know that saturating a core section does not take much power. Another 'novel' thing here is, is that the flux from the input coil never interacts with the output coil so there is a separation. That way only the flux from the magnet will do the power 'generation'.

I also found some other info about it on some MegBuilders group, here it is:
Hi all!

I recently discovered one Bulgarian experimenter that built MEG like
device with COP > 1. His Website is here: www.inkomp-delta.com. The
site is in Bulgarian, so I asked him and he uploaded one page in
English (http://www.inkomp-delta.com/page9.html).

Valeri generously agreed to answer my questions and we talked for a
few hours. There are 2 conclusions that I got from this conversation,
and I want to share them with you guys:

1. Valeri claims that magnetic flux from control coil and output coil
should be separated. He claims that the structure presented in TB
patent (with mutual flux for both coils) cannot work. He worked
around this problem by inserting additional toroidal core inside the
main core. The control coil is winded on the additional core but its
flux does not go to the output coil.

2. He also claims that capacitor is absolutely necessary to be
connected to the output coil to obtain resonance. It also makes TB's
patent claims about zero phase difference between output coil voltage
and current somewhat suspicious.

There were also other interesting points like:

3. He said that nanocrystalline material is not absolutely necessary
for the effect to be observed. Such materials can improve efficiency,
but nothing unique happens inside the core. For example, one of his
prototypes with measurements published on the Website
(http://www.inkomp-delta.com/page6.html) works at 50Hz (!!!) with
regular transformer steel core and exhibits COP up to 5.4.

4. He also proposed a few constructions for his ideas in his patent
application (http://inkomp-delta.com/page4.html). It's also in
Bulgarian, but all schematic figures are in couples. The first
presents a state without current in control coil, the second presents
a state with current in control coil. Permanent magnet flux is in
blue. Control coil flux is in red.

I hope the above points will help somebody. At least for me it
changed a lot.

So there you have it. What do you think?
I have not seen this being discussed before on overunity.com
So maybe any of you have some insights in this tech or maybe speak Bulgarian and be able to translate the whole lot?

Thanks!
Regards,
Logan

Yes, very interesting stuff...

... a variation on the MEG, and one that does work?
cool

Thanks!

Hmm yes although is might fall in the MEG category this device is much different. Input and output are cleverly separated. It is the magnet that does the 'work' and the input coil that does the gating. But the input coil flux does not seem to interact with the output coil. He also states that this is a main reason why the meg and alike systems will not work, I'm not super sure why that would be 'that' important?
Plus special stuff like metglass is not needed he says.

Steven

Hmm yes although is might fall in the MEG category this device is much different. Input and output are cleverly separated. It is the magnet that does the 'work' and the input coil that does the gating. But the input coil flux does not seem to interact with the output coil. He also states that this is a main reason why the meg and alike systems will not work, I'm not super sure why that would be 'that' important?
Plus special stuff like metglass is not needed he says.

Steven

Hello Steven,

The MEG and similar setups like Bearden et al in their patent or Naudin showed are normal transformers with primary (input) and secondary (output) windings  on a common ferromagnetic core, except for a permanent magnet in the middle column.  So if you remove the magnet, and start exciting the input coils, their setup readily continue working as a normal transformer because all the coils share a common flux path just like in a normal transformer,  the magnet does nothing else but shift the working area in the B-H curve of the core. And if you study the Megbuilders yahoo group, several members replicated this kind of MEG during the years and NONE of them showed extra output!  Only the Bearden team and Naudin alone claimed overunity.

In this Bulgarian type MEG, if you remove the magnet, the setup cannot readily work as a normal tranformer because the reasons you also wrote above.  So the input coils magnetic flux does not interact with the output coils flux, hence the output load cannot readily reflect in the input coils. 

I understand that a common flux path that is shared by both the input and output coils is NOT neccessarily a drawback in achieving overunity in a so called overunity setup  BUT in the normal MEG setup this seems to be a problem in practice: no overunity comes out in the replicators' MEG devices.  Years ago I also replicated the MEG and got a decent 87% efficiency (COP of 0.87). 
It is possible that Bearden at al have been hiding some important details but if there is any secret, then they have been sitting on it for at least a decade now and one wonders what are they waiting for to mass produce (or at least demonstrate) their claimed kW versions???  My only logical deduction is: their shown setup does not produce extra output and they have no secret....

rgds,  Gyula

...See the attached photo's (Or the one on their page) they have these 'toroid' (close looped) input core sections which will function as a 'magnetic resistor' once magnetized/saturated. And so the flux form the magnet will have to find another way around. ...

Why do you think so? If the current flows the same direction in the two control coils, it provides a circulary flux in the toroidal core as showed on the picture. But the flux from the magnet just adds in one branch of the toroid core and substracts in the other one. If we suppose the core is not saturated, we are in a linear domain so we just get a superposition of the magnetics fields and flux from coils and magnets. This can't change the flux in the output coil.

For changing the flux in the output coil, either the flux from the two control coils have to oppose each other or the toroidal core must be saturated.
In the first case the flux from each control coil will add together through the main circuit and superpose to that of the magnet thus the varying flux in the output coil will be only that of the control coils.
In the second case it is not possible to saturate equally the two branches of the toroid core because the flux is not the same (coil flux + magnet flux in a branch, coil flux - magnet flux in the other). But imagine we could. In order to saturate the core we will have to generate a flux at least superior to that of the magnet thus needing more energy than that being providing by the redirected flux of the magnet through the output coil.

It is a common error to not think about flux and fields as "superposition" although we deal with linear domains.  And to saturate core is wasting energy. No FE this way :-(

Fran?ois

Here can a video be seen.

http://inkomp-delta.com/page7.html

So you can see, that they have have about 2:1 overunity output.

Very interesting ou transformer.

On youtube they also have these video.

Please can somebody translate their website into english
and let us know, what the inventor says in the video ?
Many thanks.

This looks fascinating, it's on my todo list for tomorrow as well.

Hi all,
I loocked to that hungarian site. Is there someboddy that downloade that site in the begin of this tread? It changed alot in between, some pages are not the same animore. I am particulary looking for any schematic on the electrical side of this OU transformer.
Thank you,
Willy