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: Graham Gunderson's Energy conference presentation Most impressive and mysterious  (Read 193122 times)

poynt99

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 3582
Even though the current and voltage are 90 degrees out of phase, the _current_ is very real and in the devices we are discussing can be pretty large, tens or even hundreds of amps. This current produces a very real, changing magnetic field, which in turn can induce a voltage in another magnetically coupled coil, even at some distance. Can this induced secondary voltage then provide real power to a load?
A simple yes or no would suffice. Can there be real power measured and delivered to the load in the setup shown in my diagram, assuming a non-OU device as the DUT?

poynt99

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 3582
Well, then, my measurements of my devices definitely qualify, because there is very little distance between the thick PCB traces that connect the mosfet Drains to the capacitors of the tank circuit and the primary coil, and I am attaching my probes quite near the board or even sometimes directly to the mosfet drains, whereas the coil itself has perhaps 6 cm (x2) of straight wire standing it off of the board. The 0.25 ohm non-inductive Ayrton-Perry-wound current-viewing resistor pair is at the board end of one of the coil legs.

However as you have poynted out, Gunderson's measurements are apparently taken nearer to the transformer rather than directly at the H-bridge output. The actual distance is unknown (at least by me).
What frequency is this device running at?

Spokane1

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 115
Obviously I disagree.

Furthermore, what do you make of this statement:If by "back end FETs" he means the H-bridge, then it becomes very clear that the exact specifics of the H-bridge and its drive parameters are critical to the performance of the entire unit. Therefore the power supplied to the H-bridge is part of the power necessary to produce the effect and must be included in the "input power" for the COP calculation. Ditto for the FETs in the "synchronous diode".

Dear TinselKoala,

Graham was referring to one of the Synchronous Diode FET's that he pointed out and put his fingers on when commenting on the impact of placing that a pF capacitor at that location.

Spokane1

Spokane1

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 115
Dear Builders,

While a most interesting discussion rages between the measurement specialists the rest of us builders can get down to the real task at hand. Here is a first run dissection of the logic board. More details to follow this week as I get time at work to draft the actual schematic.

Spokane1

TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13958
What frequency is this device running at?

The MicroQEG runs at about 300 kHz and the wireless transmitter/receiver systems run typically around 800-900 kHz.

Here's an image of one of the wireless transmitter systems under construction. Missing are the chokes, heatsinks and single-turn output loop.

TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13958
@Spokane1: Thanks for posting that clear photo of the breadboard. And good luck on drawing out the schematic!

However, if it turns out that the "overunity" is a result of improper and/or imprecise measurements... what then is the point? I should think that the priority would be to address the measurement issues on GG's actual device first, to confirm (or disconfirm) the validity of the measurements. Of course this would require his cooperation, which I realize we are unlikely to get.  What would be the point in "replicating" a complex device if it turns out that there is nothing really unusual about it except that it is a measurement nightmare? Especially if one can obtain the same kind of measurement results using much simpler and cheaper circuitry...

TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13958
Dear TinselKoala,

Graham was referring to one of the Synchronous Diode FET's that he pointed out and put his fingers on when commenting on the impact of placing that a pF capacitor at that location.

Spokane1

OK, thanks. And what are the implications of that? How and why does placing a small capacitance across one of the SD FETs kill the overunity effect? This is on the _output_ side of the transformer, right? If the transformer is the OU component, how could something downstream of it make the OU go away?

forest

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4076
OK, thanks. And what are the implications of that? How and why does placing a small capacitance across one of the SD FETs kill the overunity effect? This is on the _output_ side of the transformer, right? If the transformer is the OU component, how could something downstream of it make the OU go away?


Something of very high frequency going to ground by capacitor which is short in hf ???

Spokane1

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 115
@Spokane1: Thanks for posting that clear photo of the breadboard. And good luck on drawing out the schematic!

However, if it turns out that the "overunity" is a result of improper and/or imprecise measurements... what then is the point? I should think that the priority would be to address the measurement issues on GG's actual device first, to confirm (or disconfirm) the validity of the measurements. Of course this would require his cooperation, which I realize we are unlikely to get.  What would be the point in "replicating" a complex device if it turns out that there is nothing really unusual about it except that it is a measurement nightmare? Especially if one can obtain the same kind of measurement results using much simpler and cheaper circuitry...

Dear TinselKoala,

We may be facing a gross instrument error as you have pointed out.  However, as I have said before the approach employed by Graham is so darn close to the same excitation protocol use in the Gray Technology that I can't help but take notice. I don't know if you are a  betting man, but setting all the instrumentation issues aside for the moment, what are the chances that inventors 50 years apart would claim and tentatively measure significant OU properties using the same fundamental approach? To me (and I only speak for myself) it is well worth at least a year and $3k to dig into this mystery.

It would be helpful to me if you describe what your recommended testing protocol would be for this kind of device. It will be several weeks before I get to that point, but think about it now and then. I can make provisions in the power supply layout that will help account for the power to the FET drivers and any other leakage points you have observed.

The fundamental operating frequency will be around 50 kHz. The Gray system ran at 46 KHz. This does not include all the harmonics created by those weird discontinuous wave forms.

I don't see how the H-Bridge is going to get much closer to the conversion transformer without getting in the way. So, there is going to be 8" - 10" between the H-Bridge/Tank and the transformer primary. The capacitor array can be consolidated. Actually it could probably be moved to the top of the transformer if it doesn't get in the way of the bias PM's.

From scanning your posts I believe you are concerned by phase shift differences for the traveling RF. How much of a phase shift are we looking at over a 10" distance at 50 kHz? This would be handy information going forward. I'm sure there is some way to measure or calculate it. Perhaps standard wave length calculations don't count in the measurement business when dealing with real circuits and all the parasitic parameters.

How about taking all the input energy (including the driver and logic power) from a 220 VDC battery array then measure the DC energy in and the DC energy out. Would this approach eliminate these RF phase delay questions?  This is doable I suppose a well regulated power supply would work just as well. If this technology is viable then we might need an extra 25% more input power. That would raise the measured input power from 1.53 watts to 1.91 watts . That would lower the COP from 6.12 to 5.07 and address all your measurement concerns (I think). This assumes that the output power can remain at 10 watts.

Anyway, how good are you at TTL? I have one IC on the logic board that I can't identify (yet). Do you have enough experience to know what chip it should be by looking at the connected components? I don't.

Also, I notice that you quote Dr. Feynman at the bottom of your posts. I thought you might be interested in a book that Graham's uses as his EM Bible. It is written by a close colleague of Dr. Feynman. In the preface Carver Mead recounts how Dr. Feynman was the inspiration and support for this book.

Back to decoding photos. I've had lost of experience doing this with the E.V. Gray materials.

Spokane1

Spokane1

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 115
Let the Junk Box Replication Experiments Begin!

k4zep

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 650
Let the Junk Box Replication Experiments Begin!

Right on Mark!

Ben K4ZEP

tinman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5365
Considering TK's described scenario, a question to all:

With a given black box power source producing a pure sine wave, and when measured the voltage and current are precisely 90º out of phase, could there be real power delivered and measured at the load?

See attached representation of this hypothetical setup.

Yes,there most defiantly can be real power delivered to the load in this case,and the higher the frequency,the greater the real power delivered to the load.


Brad

TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13958
@Spokane1:
Yes, I've done a bit of TTL design. I may be able to figure out the unknown chip if you can provide an actual schematic. No way I can do it from just looking at the photo of the breadboard.

TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13958
The MicroQEG runs at about 300 kHz and the wireless transmitter/receiver systems run typically around 800-900 kHz.

Here's an image of one of the wireless transmitter systems under construction. Missing are the chokes, heatsinks and single-turn output loop.

And fwiw I was able to find the "first light" testing image of the completed system with its receiver, lighting up an incandescent bulb.

k4zep

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 650
@Spokane1:
Yes, I've done a bit of TTL design. I may be able to figure out the unknown chip if you can provide an actual schematic. No way I can do it from just looking at the photo of the breadboard.

TK, your a comedian!.  ;D If he had a schematic, he wouldn't need your help!

Ben K4ZEP