Storing Cookies (See : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) 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:
https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding

User Menu

Custom Search

Author Topic: Confirming the Delayed Lenz Effect  (Read 870095 times)

gyulasun

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4117
Re: Confirming the Delayed Lenz Effect
« Reply #285 on: October 09, 2011, 12:17:03 PM »
DEAR GYULA,

THAT'S FUNNY THEY DID THE SAME THING WITH MY "INFINITY GENERATOR" PROVISIONAL PATENT.
TO TELL YOU THE TRUTH I FORGOT ABOUT THAT APPLICATION.
LET ME ROOT AROUND IN MY FILES TO SEE IF I CAN FIND THE ACTUAL FILING DIAGRAMS AND I WILL POST IT ASAP.

WHAT ARE YOU LOOKING FOR SPECIFICALLY?

ALSO CAN YOU POST THE LINK?

CHEERS
T

Hi Thane,

Here is a link to your application (Toroid Generator Coil) to the Canadian Patent Office:
http://brevets-patents.ic.gc.ca/opic-cipo/cpd/eng/patent/2602439/summary.html?type=number_search

I simply wished to see the Figures to better understand your setup described in the application.

Thanks,  Gyula

gyulasun

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4117
Re: Confirming the Delayed Lenz Effect
« Reply #286 on: October 09, 2011, 01:07:34 PM »
Hi Folks,

Regarding the efficiency calculations I think the main power source for this setup is the battery bank, it supplies 62.4V DC voltage and the current taken is about 8.3mA  (83mV/10 Ohm) so this gives a total input power of 0.517W.

If we can agree on this half a watt input power than the the efficiency of the H-bridge is what comes into the picture next and I suppose here it has a 90% efficiency, this reduces the possible input power to the transformer to 0.517*0.9=0.465W.

Now the transformer efficiency is (0.1107/0.465)*100=23.8%  (Note: This depends on the efficiency number we consider for the H-bridge.)

When a load connected to the mains consumes only reactive current, the reactive current has to come from somewhere and it is also the mains, though most watthours meters do not measure it...  hence when you wish to create the reactive current you have to furnish real power first.

Gyula

nul-points

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 995
    • Doc Ringwood's Free Energy blog
Re: Confirming the Delayed Lenz Effect
« Reply #287 on: October 09, 2011, 01:52:51 PM »
@nul-points, sorry but I have to give you 'zero points' for your input calculation. (please don't take it personal)

I say this because you are forgetting one very important parameter which also should be added in your input power calculation.
[...]
With Kind Regards, Overunityguide

i agree - my bad - i regarded the i/p as from a single-ended driver, but of course, although Luc has a unipolar DC i/p supply, he is using an H-bridge!

with 32mA RMS i/p current (measured on the 1 ohm shunt) and a bipolar 61.5 RMS i/p voltage (measured across the primary coil) the average power i/p is approx 0.55W

so the transformer efficiency = 0.1107 / 0.55 = approx 20%

CRANKYpants

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1062
Re: Confirming the Delayed Lenz Effect
« Reply #288 on: October 09, 2011, 02:02:52 PM »
DEAR LUC,

YOUR H BRIDGE IS A THING OF BEAUTY 8) BUT

HERE IS MY SUGGESTION...

REPLACE THE PRIMARY IN THE BiTT WITH THE BI-FILAR BECAUSE IT "APPEARS" TO BE GIVING SOME GOOD LENZ DELAY.

THEN RUN THE BiTT WITH 60 HZ SINE WAVE AND SEE WHAT HAPPENS THEN TWEAK THE FREQUENCY TO SEE WHERE YOU GET THE BEST PERFORMANCE.

THEN ONCE YOU HAVE ESTABLISHED SOME GOOD RESULTS GO BACK TO DC STUFF WITH THE AC STUFF AS YOUR POINT OF REFERENCE.  :P

BUT BEFORE YOU DO THAT I WOULD (INDEPENDENTLY) TEST THE BiTT AS IS JUST TO SEE WHERE IT IS AT AS WELL SO YOU WILL KNOW IF THE BI-FILAR PRIMARY PROVIDES BETTER PERFORMANCE.

CHEERS
T


gotoluc

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3096
Re: Confirming the Delayed Lenz Effect
« Reply #289 on: October 09, 2011, 02:30:09 PM »
DEAR LUC,

YOUR H BRIDGE IS A THING OF BEAUTY 8) BUT

HERE IS MY SUGGESTION...

REPLACE THE PRIMARY IN THE BiTT WITH THE BI-FILAR BECAUSE IT "APPEARS" TO BE GIVING SOME GOOD LENZ DELAY.

THEN RUN THE BiTT WITH 60 HZ SINE WAVE AND SEE WHAT HAPPENS THEN TWEAK THE FREQUENCY TO SEE WHERE YOU GET THE BEST PERFORMANCE.

THEN ONCE YOU HAVE ESTABLISHED SOME GOOD RESULTS GO BACK TO DC STUFF WITH THE AC STUFF AS YOUR POINT OF REFERENCE.  :P

BUT BEFORE YOU DO THAT I WOULD (INDEPENDENTLY) TEST THE BiTT AS IS JUST TO SEE WHERE IT IS AT AS WELL SO YOU WILL KNOW IF THE BI-FILAR PRIMARY PROVIDES BETTER PERFORMANCE.

CHEERS
T

Hi Thane,

I agree!

This will be my next step and in the exact way you suggest.

I just couldn't resist :D to test the Bifilar Coil to see if it worked also in a transformer application.

I'll be out all day today so it will go to Monday or later for results

Thanks for all your help Thane

Luc

wattsup

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2606
    • Spin Conveyance Theory - For a New Perspective...
Re: Confirming the Delayed Lenz Effect
« Reply #290 on: October 09, 2011, 05:05:05 PM »
@gotoluc

What's do'in.

Since Thane loaned you his BiTT transformer coil that has the three coils. S1-Primary-S2. Consider this.

Take one secondary and call it a primary. The other secondary is your 1st secondary. The center primary is your 2nd secondary or your main output. Now if the two original secondaries are wound identical, maybe consider removing 1/2 % (or less) of the winding from the new primary. Or just try this as is for now.

So you now have Primary-Main Output-Secondary.

Now pulse the primary to attain the secondary resonance and check that output and see what the output is on the Main Output. The idea here is that if the primary is pulsed to the secondary resonance, it will be consuming very little energy making it easier for the secondary to return its output back to the primary. Now if at the same time the Main Output can produce juice, well, well, you may have a winner.

Actually this general idea came to me while working on the SM TPUs as I think this is the base idea of how it works, except in the SM TPU I am trying with a core of insulated baling wire and is also the output. So in my present tests the core is used to transfer coupling energy from primary to secondary plus also giving output itself. lol

I had prepared the image below a few days ago but waited to post it because I thought it was not the right moment. I am very curious to know what the resonant frequencies are on the BiTT as we know Thane only runs the thing at 60hz.

Maybe one other note on MOTs.

The second image I had done in 2008 to show how to grind one of the top laminated welds that permits you to just pry off the top laminated section with a good side hit using a hammer. Now if you had two identical MOTS, you take one of them and remove the top laminate. This proves that the top laminate block is only held there with the welds and that the metal lamination plates are not inter twinned with the other vertical laminate sides. So if you take this cut MOT and now secure the cut end against the top block of the second complete MOT, this will give you a MOT with two primaries and two secondaries. Of course this is not a BiTT replication but it does give you so many other ways to drive it like putting both primaries in series, etc, etc. Actually the cut MOT could also be used as a pick-up coil when using rotating wheel magnets.

Besides that, hope everything is well in Camelot.

wattsup


Overunityguide

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 107
Re: Confirming the Delayed Lenz Effect
« Reply #291 on: October 09, 2011, 10:54:29 PM »
I WILL REQUEST (AGAIN) THAT YOU USE YOUR GENERATOR OUTPUT AS THE INPUT TO YOUR MOT   :P... YOUR INDUCTION MOTOR IS OPERATING AT 950 HZ BUT YOUR GENERATOR MUST BE AT ABOUT 2700 HZ OR SO.

I JUST THINK THIS WOULD A COOL VIDEO  8)...

CHEERS
T

Dear Thane,

Today I have tried to speed up my motor generator a bit more... But unfortunately I come across some practical problems when doing this...

My biggest problem when trying to run this setup on higher frequencies is that above 150 Hz going to my normal induction motor the rotor slip becomes too big. So above 150 Hz my rotor goes out sink and after a while results in a total dead stop of my rotor...

Although this phenomenon could be expected, because each induction motor has its own U/f characteristics. Which means that at higher frequencies the frequency drive controller must supply a higher voltage.
(this to compensate for the stator coils impedances)
But in my case the highest possible voltage to drive my motor with is 240V and this upper limited value is reached at 50 Hz. Which means that at 150 Hz, my controller still is supplying 240 Volts. Where in this case it has to be 720V to stay on the same torque figures...

So to conclude, the highest possible value to run my motor generator with is 150Hz, which will result in 450Hz coming from my generator coil. So you see the 950Hz (direct from my frequency drive controller) is still the highest frequency for which I can test things on...

With Kind Regards, Overunityguide

CRANKYpants

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1062
Re: Confirming the Delayed Lenz Effect
« Reply #292 on: October 10, 2011, 12:14:47 AM »
Dear Thane,

Today I have tried to speed up my motor generator a bit more... But unfortunately I come across some practical problems when doing this...

With Kind Regards, Overunityguide


DEAR O.U.G.

WHEN EDISON WAS WORKING ON THE LIGHT BULB HE WAS ASKED BY SOMEONE (PROBABLY A REPORTER) IF HE WAS JUST WASTING EVERYONE'S TIME AFTER 10,000 TRIES. HE SAID, "NOT AT ALL WE HAVE SIMPLY IDENTIFIED 10,000 THINGS THAT DON'T WORK."

SO UNLESS WE ARE WILLING TO TRY (AND FAIL) WE CAN'T REALLY KNOW FOR SURE WHICH IS JUST A DIFFERENT FORM OF SUCCESS.   

NICE TRY ANYWAY AND FOR TEACHING US ALL SOMETHING NEW.  ;)

CHEERS
T

BTW - WHAT IS YOUR NEXT PROJECT/VIDEO THAT YOU ARE GOING TO DAZZLE US WITH?  8)

CRANKYpants

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1062
Re: Confirming the Delayed Lenz Effect
« Reply #293 on: October 10, 2011, 12:27:23 AM »
@gotoluc

Consider this.

Take one secondary and call it a primary. The other secondary is your 1st secondary. The center primary is your 2nd secondary or your main output. Now if the two original secondaries are wound identical, maybe consider removing 1/2 % (or less) of the winding from the new primary. Or just try this as is for now.

So you now have Primary-Main Output-Secondary.

Now pulse the primary to attain the secondary resonance and check that output and see what the output is on the Main Output. The idea here is that if the primary is pulsed to the secondary resonance, it will be consuming very little energy making it easier for the secondary to return its output back to the primary. Now if at the same time the Main Output can produce juice, well, well, you may have a winner.

wattsup

HELLO WATTSUP,

CAN YOU USE THE FOLLOWING DRAWING SUPPLIED BY TESLASET TO SHOW THE PROPOSED FLUX PATH ROUTES... THAT YOU ARE PROPOSING IN YOUR PROPOSAL TO LUC?

IE TIME = 1 PRIMARY FLUX
TIME = 2 SECONDARY FLUX ROUTES

CHEERS
T

wattsup

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2606
    • Spin Conveyance Theory - For a New Perspective...
Re: Confirming the Delayed Lenz Effect
« Reply #294 on: October 10, 2011, 03:02:46 AM »
@CRANKYpants

Wow, you are asking something pretty tricky since this had not been done yet. Your tests were done with AC but this proposal is to try DC pulses, hence the same direction and also not only at 60hz but at much higher frequencies to attain resonance levels that your AC tests would never have seen.

But I gave it an educated shot to show flux path leaves the top of the primary and goes two ways, one up and one towards the center core where you have the Main Output Coil (MOC). The flux to goes down into the secondary coil and exit that coil one towards the primary and two towards the center core again.

What I am thinking is when you start the pulsing, it will take some time for the core to ramp up so you should see a gradual increase of output on both the Secondary and also on the MOC.

The secondary should show a DC output waveform. This is all theoretical but the MOC should show a totally different waveform closer to a very dense AC or double DC or + and - DC waveform. I had hoped someone would try your BiTT coil with DC for a long time now and hopefully @gotoluc will have a chance to do some experiments. There is no rush.

Also, @gotolucs 2Mhz limit should me high enough to reach some resonance levels since the now Primary has many winds.

One thing though about DC pulsing in wound coils. The tests can be done with the coil as is but you can also try pulsing the primary with any other type of coil in series to the primary coil and see what the differences are. If my hunch is correct, you should see more output from the secondary and the MOC when another coil is in series with the primary. In this case the primary should be on the pulsed side. The reason for that is complicated but it would be a good test just to show the differences. We can always get into the whys afterwards. The series coil should have at least 50% or more of the primary inductance.

Ahhhhhhh. What a great weekend and Monday off. More time to work on the bench. lol

wattsup


CRANKYpants

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1062
Re: Confirming the Delayed Lenz Effect
« Reply #295 on: October 10, 2011, 05:43:53 PM »
HAPPY THANKSGIVING TO ALL MY FELLOW CANADIAN TURKEY GOBBLERS OUT THERE!  :)
CHEERS
T

gotoluc

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3096
Re: Confirming the Delayed Lenz Effect
« Reply #296 on: October 15, 2011, 05:31:19 AM »
Hi everyone,

I have an update on the Transformer Delayed Lenz Effect.

See Video for explanation: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZtIhOV00uU

The below Scope Shots are:
Ch 1 Yellow Probe is 10 Ohm Shunt Resistor, Ch 2 Lt. Blue is Coil Voltage, Ch 3 Purple is Secondary Coil 10 Ohm Load and Ch 4 is Resonator Coil 10 Ohm Load

First is Transformer @ 60Hz no Load
Second is Transformer @ 60Hz with Secondary on 10 Ohm Load
Third is Transformer @ 60Hz with Secondary on 10 Ohm Load and 29uf on Resonating Coil

Please post your comments and Power Calculations. Keep in mind the Shunt Resistor is 10 Ohms and not 1 Ohm.

Luc
« Last Edit: October 15, 2011, 07:14:59 AM by gotoluc »

gyulasun

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4117
Re: Confirming the Delayed Lenz Effect
« Reply #297 on: October 16, 2011, 12:24:24 AM »
Hi Luc,

When the secondary coils are unloaded the input power is approximately: Pin=V*I*cos82°   (I estimated from the scope shots the input voltage leads current by about 82°. How I got this 82°: the time difference between input voltage and current is about 3.8msec, this gives roughly 82°.)

So Pin=5.96*0.0508*cos82°=0.0421W

Loaded case, no capacitor, I noticed no change in the 82° phase shift :

input power  Pin=5.57*0.0548*cos82°=0.04248W

output power  Pout=0.5772/10=0.03329W

Loaded case with capacitor, I noticed the phase shift decreased to about 34.5° from 82°, this means it is decisive to watch on the scope only the voltage drop decrease across the shunt resistor, you have to consider any change in the phase shift too.

input power Pin=5.2*0.0457*cos34.5°=0.1958W

output power Pout=0.6742/10=0.04542W

circulating power in the LC (140mH 39uF) tank circuit, assuming resonance  PLC=0.4842/10=0.02342W

Efficiency in the loaded case, no cap:
Pout/Pin=(0.03329W/0.04248W)*100=78.3%

Efficiency in the loaded case with cap:
(Pout + PLC)/Pin=(0.04542W + 0.02342W)/0.1958W=0.3515*100=35.15%

So it seems this setup now behaves as a conventional transformer when there is no 39uF tuning cap connected. When the 39uF is connected to the till then 140mH idle coil, efficiency suffers, probably due to the change in the phase shift in the input voltage-current.

(I recall the 140mH coils have got a DC resistance between 120 to 180 Ohms?)

Gyula

gotoluc

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3096
Re: Confirming the Delayed Lenz Effect
« Reply #298 on: October 16, 2011, 06:53:17 PM »
Hi Gyula,

thank you for doing the power calculations.

As you can see I have no idea how to do AC Power Calculations yet but there is hope as I now understand that a higher voltage across the Shunt Resistor does not necessarily matter if the Phase (cos angle) stays the same. Do I have that correct?

I decided to look at Phase much closer on the Scope and found it did shift @60Hz.

In the First scope Shot below I expended to Scopes Voltage divisions so we could clearly see where they fall at the Zero point.
For loads I decided to separate the 2 Secondaries and used a 10 Ohm Load on each.
I found that it's only @248Hz that there is Zero Phase Shift when under Load. See Second Shot below. Frequencies above 248Hz the Phase slowly goes up and below 248Hz Phase slowly drops.

The First Shot below is the no load centered Reference. We have exactly 4 squares between each side of the rising and dropping voltage phase. Each square should be 22.5 degrees, so then one of the 5 divisions in each square should be 4.5 degrees. The Current is 3 divisions behind the Voltage (3 x 4.5 = 13.5) so 90 - 13.5 = 76.5 degrees.

So would you agree this is an accurate way to get Phase degree?

Third Shot is Complete view.

Can you re-calculate the power in vs power out with this more accurate data.

I still don't understand how you came up with the numbers above so I better let you do it. Hopefully in time I will be able to learn the equations ;D

Thanks for your time Guyla... I'll get there one step at the time thanks to people like you who are willing to help.

Luc
« Last Edit: October 16, 2011, 08:57:11 PM by gotoluc »

CRANKYpants

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1062
Re: Confirming the Delayed Lenz Effect
« Reply #299 on: October 16, 2011, 07:45:27 PM »
The Current is 3 divisions behind the Voltage (3 x 4.5 = 13.5) so 90 - 13.5 = 76.5 degrees.
Luc

ACTUALLY LUC THE CURRENT LAGS THE VOLTAGE BY 17 DIVISIONS AND 17 x 4.5 = 76.5 DEGREES
I know it's anal but... ;)

SO YOUR POWER IN = Vprimary x Iprimary x COS 76.5 (COS 76.5 = 0.233)
SO YOUR POWER IN = Vprimary x Iprimary x 0.233

Pout = Vload^2 / Rload

CHEERS
T