NRamaswami,


please excuse when I sounded upset. You are right, permanent magnets are never mentioned in the patent. As for patents that may already exist, I do not care since I don't plan to build commercial quantities (or would not be allowed for obvious reasons). I see this more as a subcultural opportunity. And a patent alows to reconstruct the device for purposes of study.
And as a matter of free energy, to be honest, I think patents that forbid to use magnets as a source of energy (which is considered impossible by the establishment) in 2014, are simply not acceptable for me and for mankind.


I am no engineer eighter, and I declared myself as a dummy too, so I hope I didn't insult you by that. If we were engineers, we probably would never try these things.


NomoreSlave,


thanks for your conformation. Well spotted, it's about flux path switching. When two loops are offered to the magnet, it may take only llittle energy to "suggest a decision" to the magnet. Good coupling of coils and cores is neccessary, as wel as high permeability for the [] core, and the magnet should be of the right strength, not neccessarily the stronger the better. As for the core, I'm trying to obtain some metglass ATM.


BTW. I'd also suggest Sweets VTA, Vacum triode amplifer, the name was given by bearden, tho there's no vacum and no triode in it, but it uses Permanent magnets. Very diffrent from mine, but interesting. Reports of successful reconstruction do exist.

Hi Dieter:

No need to seek excuses or apologies. My problem is that I have to get a lot of things done and this forum is addictive. If you go through history of Magnetics, Maxwell and Faraday both postulated and believed that invisible particles move from one pole to other pole. These particles have kinetic energy. So they called it Magnetic Kinetic Energy. Then the equations were altered for simplication purposes. Then the theories were altered. Since I do not have a background in any one of these things I ended up asking various configuration of windings and ended up testing using high voltage up to 220 volts and 32 amps of power as input to huge coils and large size cores. Failed many times succeeded many times and I believe I understand the principles involved now. But not yet sure..This is my status.

After filing several patents for me I will provide the patent content here..No problem..Then you would all know what I have done from 22nd July to 30 July 2013 and then what are insights gained subsequently. But I have a hectic work schedule and am not able to contribute here. I'm sorry. It is not due to lack of interest but lack of time..

There is nothing to stop the flux path from following all the way around if it alternates it will still go all the around and fluctuate back and forth. There is nothing to stop it from doing so.The air gap doesn't stop it. It just blow out really wide and becomes weak in the air gap. Like a bar magnet ,the flux runs from one end the other but widens out and becomes weakest in the middle where the flux is furthest from either pole. If it runs round in a complete path it works same as a transformer with one of it's ends cut off.

We can make an electromagnet stronger by doing these things:
wrapping the coil around an iron core  adding more turns to the coil > Reduces current by resistance due to length
increasing the current flowing through the coil. > Requires thicker wire and results in fewer turns and succesive layers decline in the additional strength to the field with distance from the core.

 What is not said is what you need. Everything that is said is true.

I'm not disputing what was said but Sorry i'm not good at cat n mouse games.  can you at least cough up a hair ball for me ( ie.. a clue)
i plan on using 18 awg on my primary laminated cores with 100 volts or so @ 1 amp power supply i built and 8 awg on my secondaries. i plan on using a adjustable vitreous wound resistor with multiple taps,  timed with a board i designed having nine channels/Transistors for #1 and #2 board has two channels that i built. i am not an Electrical Buff or an Engineer so "YES I COULD USE SOME HELP". ive been busting my balls on ideas for this post with no avail .tired of being shot down from people that has no working model...plus darn Iron laminates still not here.
I brought up John Reardon because I think it is relevant to this project as they are so similar and both achieved OU.
i have read and re read every thing i can get my hands on pertaining to this post.....what next

There is nothing to stop the flux path from following all the way around if it alternates it will still go all the around and fluctuate back and forth. There is nothing to stop it from doing so.The air gap doesn't stop it. It just blow out really wide and becomes weak in the air gap. Like a bar magnet ,the flux runs from one end the other but widens out and becomes weakest in the middle where the flux is furthest from either pole. If it runs round in a complete path it works same as a transformer with one of it's ends cut off.

Why would you want the flux NOT  go trough it? Isn't that the whole point? But there's an other thing: i assume the left and right primaries are pulsed in alternating amplitude? That would mean that each back emf, caused by the end of a pulse, would fight against the pulse in the other primary, reducing the efficiency. If you turn one primary upside down, this would do the opposite, the back emf of one coil becomes the afterburner of the other coil, increasing voltage but leave amperage stabile. Reducing the duty time of the pulse, as well as a brutal square wave shape (although contradicting the sinusoid round shape by Figueras commutator) may increase efficiency even further.


To utilize the back emf is not normal for a transformer.
Actually it's more of a back emp than emf, electromotive pulse that is caused by B Field collapse . Actually, it delivers pretty much all the required energy to establish the B Field of the next pulse in the other primary, therefor these coils practically can switch polarity with almost zero input power. Just don't hold the field, that ain't neccessary since only the chanches will induce current in the secondary anyway... so the key may be: switch polarity without any pauses, as fast as the core allows. Iron I guess <1 khz, but think ferrite, or on ebay they got metglas cores for 50 bucks...


I refer to my ferrite core experiment, where I was getting 25 Volt from 1 volt input, tho the ratio of turns was 2 to 1, not 25 to 1. Airgaps are seen in many similar designs, see the great pdf "chapter3"(on page 1 of the "i tried to replicate smith device" in solid state devices). Getting 25V was an anomaly, regardless of efficiency, and the art of reaching high efficiency in any coil-core-coil transfer is truely a science by it's own, not simple at all. For instance, a core must be about 95% Saturated to be effective. 101% and nothing goes, or 45%, poor efficiency. So the dimensions are important. Size, turns, voltage, it all plays together.


NRamadwami, wish you all the best in your daily duties.


Solarlab, thanks for the links!

To those who said I should post results of my permanent magnet version, Alternating Flux Amplifier AFA, here's some information.


I do now definitely know that PMs are a real option.
I made a simple setup: a steel core 5mm, length about 15cm. In the center there's a coil with a fine wire and many turns, probably thousands. It has a high impendance, but picks up small inductive fields pretty well. It's winded on a plastic tube that fits nicely on the 5mm core.


On both sides of this coil I got two low impendance coils. They are smaller, less turns, thicker wire, maybe 0.3mm.
They don't fit very well as their core diameter should be about 10mm, so they are loose. They are connected in parallel, with the halfrectified pulse of a 50 hz 12vac supply source, so these pulses are the positive part of the sinuswave only, with 50% idle time between pulses. The output of the middle coil is rectified by 4 diodes.
Note: my voltmeter may show silly values, but this is about the diffrence between a setup with and without magnets.


Voltage was measured without a load:
With two Neodymium Magnets attached to the ends of the core: 225 vdc


Without the Neodyms: 140 vdc


With the Neos with wrong polarity attached: less than 140, maybe 90 vdc


The Amps were measured in parallel with a 1.8 kOhm Resistor load, the voltage dropped almost to zero, but this is only about the diffrence between magnets and no magnets:


With Neos: 260 DCmA
Without: 200DCmA


Then I used little steel rods instead of the Neos, to see if it was only a higher inductance that caused the gain, but nope, voltage and ampere were lower than without anything attached.


This test has clearly shown: attaching 2 Magnets to the ends of a dc pulsed core increased voltage and ampere, if attached with the correct polarity. Using the wrong polarity, even only on one of them, but especially on both, decreased the output substancially, by more than half.


Also interesting: a test with a resistor between supply and setup , so the whole thing would not run with the full power of the 7.5 VA supply, reversed the result, adding the neodyms reduced the efficiency in general. This means, the gain by PMs requires a certain core saturation in relation to the PM strenght and core size.


Conclusion: Permanent Magnets can truely generate electric current! OU seems to be only a matter of proper implementation of the inductive coupling.

here is a little humor i thought would liven up your day.

THE MATRIX RELOADED.....  (FIGUERAS STYLE)

I know, i know, i have to much time on my hands. i just couldn't resist, he, he, he !