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: Eds design  (Read 93551 times)

Spokane1

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 115
Re: Eds design
« Reply #60 on: August 24, 2008, 11:26:58 PM »
Installment #4

Dear E.V. Gray Researchers,

Here are three better views of the ?CSET? devices that were used with the EMA6 at the 1/9/76 stockholders meeting.

I have already expressed my technical and political views on this device. These photos are offered for researchers that have a different professional opinion (good for you) and are looking for additional information.

Take a close look at photo CSET4 300-4. Notice the large gauge (about #12 AWG or greater) bare copper wire that appears to be connected to the 1? in diameter center electrode. It also appears to be connected to the large white wire that goes directly to the motor case. In the CSET patents it is the ?grid? that is suppose to connect to the motor, not one of the electrodes. You draw your own conclusions.

Keep in mind that the CSET patent documents didn?t get started for another 8 years after these photos were taken. It seems to me that is a long delay in seeking protection for the heart of an age-changing technology ? but I wasn?t there to know the whole story.

I know that John Bedini?s field notes describe a circuit that is a dead ringer for the CSET patent drawings, but I just can?t get all these clues to jive just right to follow the detailed technical evolution of this circuit.

In photo CSET 300-5 you can also see another bare copper wire connecting the CSET to a terminal on the dual capacitor.


Spokane1

Spokane1

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 115
Re: Eds design
« Reply #61 on: August 24, 2008, 11:31:51 PM »
Installment #5

Dear E.V. Gray Researchers,

Here is an out of focus photo of the front end of the EMA4-E2 taken in 1974.

Take a close look at the little rectangular box that is in the middle of the blue support arm that holds the DC motor/generator.

I use to think this feature was a circuit board that probably was some kind of a speed transducer. Boy, was I wrong. The new photos show what it really is. The old B&W photo that I got this erroneous idea from was the 1973 article by Jack Scagnetti. This just shows you how bad conclusions can easily be drawn from poor photos.

It really is a view port that was machined right through the motors front face. From another photo you can see that the front place is about 2? thick. Marvin Cole certainly didn?t want any slippage in his front shaft bearings.  I suppose the rear motor plate is just as thick, but it was intended to support a transmission. The Plexiglas is about ?? thick.

This feature did not exist on this motor in late 1971 it was added during one of the many remodels and upgrades. This pretty well proves that design and programming improvements were still taking place after the motor was first built.

The important technical fact (to me any way) is that you can see the rotor through the window. This is the only photo in existence that shows anything about the EMA4-E2 rotor. As you can tell it follows the patent really close. There had been some speculation by some researchers who thought the rotor was really a single electromagnet design and not the ?Major- Minor? structure that we see now.

In this view there has been a re-arrangement of the outboard support devices compared to the 1971 model. Here the alternator has been replaced with a DC generator which also serves as a DC start motor. The air pump has been relocated to the position on the left. I think this is definite improvement in layout. Not only were they able to eliminate one outboard device (and its V-belt) but the air piping is much simpler and straight forward.

The unlabeled electronics box on the left is also the result of some post 1971 improvement. I speculate (and you got to watch me on these speculations) that it is a control box for two strobe lamps, one for the motor and one for the switching system. When this box appeared there was an additional toggle switch that was added between the two lower meters on the motor control panel. It is labeled ?CTL LAMP?.


Spokane1

Spokane1

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 115
Re: Eds design
« Reply #62 on: August 24, 2008, 11:39:22 PM »
Installment #6

Dear E.V. Gray Researchers,

Here is a B&W professional photo taken of the EMA4-E1 when it was first completed in late 1971. This is one view of a series of three photos done in the same period.

You may have seen this photo a number of times. This one sports an automatic transmission. With the higher resolution scan we can focus on the mysterious component ?The Floating Flux Field?.

I won?t bore you with a long lecture on the significance of this novel feature. I?ve spent many moons beating my head against the wall attempting to figure out what this strange inductor like component does. The main thing to consider is that Marvin Cole thought it was very important. It shows up in five of his drawings in the Gray Pulse Motor Patent. It is labeled as item #114 and/or #23/#24.

In the patent Dr. Chalfin says ??we believe it to be a delay line.? which means he didn?t have a clue. I have always got a laugh out of that line. How can the creator of this technology be so uncertain about the purpose of his own work?  Obviously, neither he nor E.V. Gray came up with this component.

A similar component also shows up in the early ?Coil Popping? photos. In comparing these two implementations it appears that their structure is more similar than I thought. What I see in the enlargement FFF photo is a 10 turn - two layer structure composed of some large black cable. The single white cable, on the right, is a set of bundled control conductors going to the power supply from the control panel. The irregular white strip on the left is added insulation in between the two layers to help better separate the cables from each other. This implies there is some high voltage potential at this location that needs to be dealt with.

My examination of the size of these cables yields a diameter of between ?? to ??. I suspect that there are 12 unit power supplies in this motor. If each supply were provided with a common FFF component, as described in the pulse motor patent, then a 12 conductor cable would be needed. Common control cables generally offer 19 conductors because they pack so nice that way, but 12 conductor cables are available.

What is the purpose of this strange device? Well, I?ll be the first to say I don?t know for sure but don?t overlook its importance. Its size, its location, and its construction are all very specific and show up in two of Marvin Cole?s systems. For some reason Mr. Hackenburger didn?t include a similar device on the EMA6 and that may have been one reason why his model fell on its nose. (I?m sure there are other reasons).

If you have studied the fine details of the Tesla table top oscillators, especially the lecture to the New York Academy of Science in 1897 you will find a strange reference about how the distance and orientation of the storage capacitor had to be to the secondary of the output transformer. From my classical training this association serves no useful function at all, but if Dr. Tesla was referring to some non-disclosed non-classical process then we might have a better understanding as to what the FFF might really be for.

I speculate that it is a feedback antenna. It also serves as providing some additional EMI reduction benefits as well; in fact it might have started out just for that purpose. The anomalous processes that are taking place in the motor radiate outward and are partially harvested by this devise, then fed back to the power supply where the speculated non-classical energy is recycled in a positive feedback loop. After a number of cycles the concentration of this non-classical energy reaches a point where is can do some serious mechanical work - for free.

Spokane1

Spokane1

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 115
Re: Eds design
« Reply #63 on: August 24, 2008, 11:43:52 PM »
Installment #7

Dear E.V. Gray Researchers,

Here are two photos to consider as you attempt to make sense out of all this information in the differences between Marvin Cole?s work and that of Richard Hackenburger?s.

I still maintain that Richard did the best he could with what he had, but we still have to evaluate performance if we wish to establish how we are going to best invest our limited time and resources reverse engineering these systems.

Consider the apparatus shown in photo Dyno 72-5. This is what Marvin Cole used to provide a measurable load for his motor. It is essentially an oil pump. The high pressure side is forced through a small orifice of a known size while pressure readings are taken on either side. Some general fluid flow calculations will yield the energy dissipated. From that that exercise the motor output HP is determined ? or at least that is how I think it works, but I need to have this reviewed by a professional who works in this area.

I?m making my best guess on what the gauges are. The large gauge on the upper right is a 2% 600 psi pressure gauge to establish the magnitude of the high pressure. The smaller black gauge on the upper left is a lower range pressure meter (I guess up to 90 psi) that establishes the pressure on the low side of the orifice. The lower left black gauge is a 200? temperature gauge that is used to adjust the calculations as the oil heats up.

I would guess this system had a limit of about 150 HP. Heat was dissipated from a small air cooled transmission radiator underneath the EMA4-E2 equipment stand.

Now, take a look at what Richard had to work with in photo Pony Brake 72-3. This is a 2? wide leather strap supporting a 50 lb weight. The strap goes to a near by bench and connects to a fish (spring type) scales. By multiplying the weight registered on the scales by the speed of the motor and then by a conversion factor the general output HP could be determined.

This ?Pony Brake? method has no way to dissipate the heat generated so it is only good for very short and low power measurements. A 2 HP output would be in its range for a short run, but not much more than that or the leather would start to smoke. In fact, it they were getting anything near 100 HP the strap would be on fire in about 2 seconds.

Now which motor do you think the Japanese would offer $12 million for (in 1973 dollars) and which motor do you think investors would walk out the door and write off their losses?


Spokane1

Spokane1

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 115
Re: Eds design
« Reply #64 on: August 24, 2008, 11:47:39 PM »
Installment #8

Dear E.V. Gray Researchers,

Here are two photos to consider as you attempt to solve the mysteries of the Marvin Cole Power Supply system.

This is as much as anyone (that I know of) has seen of under the hood of the EMA4-E2 power supply. For size reference the ?hood? is about 24? wide.

I have counted those yellow wires (They appear to be 7mm Spark Plug Wires) several times using a graphics program and I still only come up with 12 wires in two groups of 6 hanging on that white support bar.

Now 12 power supplies just happens to match the number of pole sets used. There are 9 stator poles and three rotor poles = 12 poles total. So I assume one power supply for each pole.

In another photo you can see what looks like two large spark plugs mounted on one side of the hood (I assume they are on both sides). My thought is that these are some of the over voltage safety gaps.

There is also a note in the Pulse motor patent that describes that 18 capacitors are used. I don?t know how 12 power supplies divide into 18 capacitors, but I?m not done yet.

Take from this what you will.

The date on the Hood1 photo is 5/30/74

Spokane1

Spokane1

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 115
Re: Eds design
« Reply #65 on: August 24, 2008, 11:52:04 PM »
Installment #9

Dear E.V. Gray Researchers,

Here are two photos of historical interest. These are of the assumed EMA3. This is yet another prototype 9 pole motor ? not to be confused with the 3 pole series of motors that are owned by Al Francoeur that seem to use the same numbering system.

Given the time when these photos were taken it is assumed that this motor was destroyed along with the EMA4-E2 after the LA DA raid.

The close up photo (EMA3 100-5) shows that the motor is not complete. The holes that mount the electromagnets are empty. I suppose the electromagnets were cannibalized to make repairs on the EMA4-E2 ? but this is just a good story telling thought.

What we do see is 10-12? swing lathe. This piece of shop equipment plus the vertical mill seen in other photos implies that maybe Fred Lenz did fabricate most of the EMA6 after all (as he claimed in later legal action). That shows you that a father-in-law from a second marriage can be good for something after all - that is before the lawyers become involved.


Spokane1

Spokane1

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 115
Re: Eds design
« Reply #66 on: August 24, 2008, 11:56:31 PM »
Installment #10

Dear E.V. Gray Researchers,

Here is a better photo (and the last) of the EMA6 before it rides off into the FBI shredder sunset. The date of 4/25/76 shows us that this is four months after the last stockholders meeting. Richard Hackenburger and E.V. Gray are still attempting the breath some performance life into this prototype.

The improved approach is the swapping out of the one ?donut? (commutator section) for four smaller ones. What the new ones did or how they are improved over the single unit design is anybodies guess. However, that original commutator was not an inexpensive piece of equipment to have fabricated.

Obviously, they felt they had made a mistake or over extended some assumption somewhere that required a bit of re-engineering. They had already run out of money and the bones of the company were starting to be picked apart by the lawyers. It appears that Gray and Hackenburger were grasping at straws as to how to get this thing to function with no money. Richard might have been driving cab at that time to pay his rent. He was from San Diego and never went home but rather chose to stay in LA to see this adventure to his end.

As far as I know the EMA6 never did significantly improve its performance, however the modifications shown in this photo are claimed to have helped out ? but no one knows by how much or if they actually did.

Both men fully believed they had a fortune just sitting in from of them, ?now darn it, why doesn?t this thing work like the other one did??

Failure is a hard pill to swallow in any circumstance. Imagine how these men might have felt when they both realized they had an age-changing technology in their hands and then somehow it just slipped away. Both men spent the rest of their lives in pursuit of this dream.

Notice the Stroboscope on the bench behind the motor.


Spokane1


Spokane1

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 115
Re: Eds design
« Reply #67 on: August 25, 2008, 12:01:20 AM »
Installment #11

Dear E.V. Gray Researchers,

Here is a photo I find interesting. For the last 10 years the only instruments that are shown in any of the E.V.Gray photos was the venerable Triplett 630-A analog multi-meter.

Finally, here is a photo of the EMA6 with an oscilloscope shown with it - and it?s a Tektronix model to boot. I have known for a couple of years now that Gray didn?t know how to turn one of these things on let alone use it. So, it is refreshing to see that Mr. Hackenburger was actually using some real instruments.

That means that when he says his pulse widths are on the order of milliseconds and that the current magnitude reached 160 Amps we have a lot better chance of believing that he was not just blowing hot air, like E.V. Gray was known to do when it came to facts and figures.

Spokane1

forest

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4076
Re: Eds design
« Reply #68 on: August 27, 2008, 09:51:10 AM »
I found an interesting similarity between Gray circuit and this text :

http://www.intalek.com/Index/Projects/Research/FreeEnergy.pdf

which we may consider as another theory of Gray tube ;-)

Look at attached image.

"Besides this way it is possible to use pulsed mode and
switch-off the primary energy source before the
emission electrons will reach the anode, Fig.2. In this
case there is not the conductivity current between
anode and cathode and the primary source is not
discharging during its work."

What if that was the source of power in original Marvin Cole device ? A power vacuum tube maybe klystron or thyratron, something very uncommon and hard to get but able to generate large secondary electron emission current. Then Gray tube was only a switching element for that current. If so we are in hopeless situation because klystron and thyratron is almost impossible to get. That device had to have very curious features indeed - it had to work in cold cathode way and generating large current peak.I speculate that maybe it was a hand made device without  anode , just with special cathode/filament which generate large peak current slowed later by carbon and switched to copper grids by a method described above.

Spokane1

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 115
Re: Eds design
« Reply #69 on: August 28, 2008, 05:01:45 PM »
Dear forest,

I believe that there are vacuum tube structures that do have the ability to deliver some OU output - but I doubt that E.V.Gray and company did it that way. At least from a historical analysis.

The CSET has never been shown to produce any measurable OU during its two decades of existence. The only tested E.V.Gray motor that demonstrated the huge OU performance didn't have CSET's (The EMA2) and all of the "Black Box" circuits didn't have CSET's either.

All of the proposed ideas for energy tubes that I have seen from the free energy community require a vacuum. The only real CSET's in existence that I know of couldn't support a vacuum.

If you find energy vacuum tubes interesing then study Moray and/or Farnsworth. Or better yet study what Gary Magratten has done. He has probably pushed the CSET technology to its zenith and had a little funding to help out.

Richard Hackenburger (Gray's Engineer from 1973 - 1979) claims it was the spark gaps in the motor reacting with Oxygen. This is hardly the description of a vacuum condition. In fact they had to blow fresh air into the motor to keep the NO2 level down.

This is just my personal opinion for this month.

Spokane1

forest

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4076
Re: Eds design
« Reply #70 on: August 28, 2008, 10:02:07 PM »
TV set tube ? accelerated electrons ?

Spokane1

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 115
Re: Eds design
« Reply #71 on: August 30, 2008, 11:49:13 PM »
Dear forest,

To my classical knowledge free electrons can only be accelerated effectively in high vacuums (such as CRT's, vacuum power tubes, x-ray tubes, atom smashers, etc.). Free electrons in open air arcs is a far differnet kind of physics. There you have all the other mixture of hot ions to deal with. Once the free electrons pick up some velocity they run into another particle where there is a collision and yet another redistribution of the energy. The electrons do make it to the receiving electrode with a little more energy then when they started, but it is far less that what they could achieved if they were traveling in a high vacuum with out a collision every 30 nS.

Spokane1

Shanti

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 203
Re: Eds design
« Reply #72 on: September 01, 2008, 07:58:57 PM »
Quote
The only tested E.V.Gray motor that demonstrated the huge OU performance didn't have CSET's (The EMA2) and all of the "Black Box" circuits didn't have CSET's either.

Is this known? For couldn't a CSET have been in one of the black boxes?

Quote
The only real CSET's in existence that I know of couldn't support a vacuum.
Do you mean, the Promo Vid CSET and the CSETs of the EMA6-Presentation?
I personally would guess they are both fake, and not the real CSETs... (but that's just MHO)

Quote
"Besides this way it is possible to use pulsed mode and
switch-off the primary energy source before the
emission electrons will reach the anode, Fig.2. In this
case there is not the conductivity current between
anode and cathode and the primary source is not
discharging during its work.

Well OK, didn't read the PDF. But as far as I see it, the electrodes mustn't be isolated in this layout, and then there will surely be drawn some current from the source, to replace the radiated electrons.

Quote
If you have studied the fine details of the Tesla table top oscillators, especially the lecture to the New York Academy of Science in 1897 you will find a strange reference about how the distance and orientation of the storage capacitor had to be to the secondary of the output transformer. From my classical training this association serves no useful function at all, but if Dr. Tesla was referring to some non-disclosed non-classical process then we might have a better understanding as to what the FFF might really be for.

Well Tesla mentioned many times, why the distances in his devices were so crucial: To improve the developed power by a very great amount, he created standing waves on the electric lines. He also said, that even a conventional Tesla transformer would be exceptionally better if you exactly size it, so that a standing wave can develop. Most hobby-Tesla-Transformer builders are already happy, when they can get the primary and secondary perfectly in resonance. But to get them in resonance and at the same time build standing waves in the cables is extremely difficult to build. But Tesla surely mastered this art.
He also made some nice demonstartions with this. E.g. he created a standing wave in a copper bar. And now when you connected the lamp at one place, it light (amplitude point of standing wave), when you connected it at another place it remained dark (wave knot point).


forest

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4076
Re: Eds design
« Reply #73 on: September 01, 2008, 09:08:04 PM »
Is this known? For couldn't a CSET have been in one of the black boxes?
Do you mean, the Promo Vid CSET and the CSETs of the EMA6-Presentation?
I personally would guess they are both fake, and not the real CSETs... (but that's just MHO)

Well OK, didn't read the PDF. But as far as I see it, the electrodes mustn't be isolated in this layout, and then there will surely be drawn some current from the source, to replace the radiated electrons.

As far as I know this is not needed. This is a beauty of secondary emmision.But ,y knowledge of vacuum tubes is limited.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secondary_emission

Seems that we lost very valuable electrical parts when solid state come up. The last oportunity is ending know with all those LCD forced monitors and TV sets.I feel like somebody planed this... Who does know today details about secondary emmision ? What if we put such a source in positive feedback loop powered by sharp gradient unipolar impulses ?


Shanti

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 203
Re: Eds design
« Reply #74 on: September 01, 2008, 11:26:35 PM »
Quote
As far as I know this is not needed. This is a beauty of secondary emmision

Sure I know this principle, the Farnsworth Mulitpactor works like that. But you only smash out electrons out of the electrode. But somehow you again have to replace these electrons, otherwise the potential of the electrode will rise, and soon no more secondary emissions will happen, or the electrons will immediately be swallowed up again by the electrode. And I think this schema is a bit odd for this. But OK, maybe it could work, but only if all the switches were timed correctly, and this makes this design far more complicated than necessary, for a Farnsworth Multipactor does this much simpler without any switching need just with a simple LC-oscillation circuit...
So to me, this is the same principle, but in a much more unnecessary complicated version.
And as I said, even if you time it correctly, you will still need some current from the source in this arrangement, although it may be little.