Language: 
To browser these website, it's necessary to store cookies on your computer.
The cookies contain no personal information, they are required for program control.
  the storage of cookies while browsing this website, on Login and Register.

GDPR and DSGVO law

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.
Amazon Warehouse Deals ! Now even more Deep Discounts ! Check out these great prices on slightly used or just opened once only items.I always buy my gadgets via these great Warehouse deals ! Highly recommended ! Many thanks for supporting OverUnity.com this way.

User Menu

Tesla Paper

Free Energy Book

Get paid

Donations

Please Donate for the Forum.
Many thanks.
Regards, Stefan.(Admin)

A-Ads

Powerbox

Smartbox

3D Solar

3D Solar Panels

DC2DC converter

Micro JouleThief

FireMatch

FireMatch

CCKnife

CCKnife

CCTool

CCTool

Magpi Magazine

Magpi Magazine Free Rasberry Pi Magazine

Battery Recondition

Battery Recondition

Arduino

Ultracaps

YT Subscribe

Gravity Machines

Tesla-Ebook

Magnet Secrets

Lindemann Video

Navigation

Products

Products

WaterMotor kit

Statistics

  • *Total Members: 84217
  • *Latest: Jarik

  • *Total Posts: 897755
  • *Total Topics: 15822
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 1
  • *Guests: 13
  • *Total: 14

Author Topic: TD replications  (Read 109617 times)

Offline Floor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2081
Re: TD replications
« Reply #165 on: March 04, 2017, 06:09:35 AM »
@GotoLuc
   
     Awsome !

    floor

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: TD replications
« Reply #165 on: March 04, 2017, 06:09:35 AM »

Offline Floor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2081
Re: TD replications
« Reply #166 on: March 04, 2017, 06:15:37 AM »
@Nonlinear

           If you have the time, I would like to
talk over / better understand your suggested
approach.  Maybe in the topic

http://overunity.com/16954/magnets-motion-and-measurement/

       regards
           floor

Offline Cairun

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 72
Re: TD replications
« Reply #167 on: March 04, 2017, 10:17:40 AM »
@Luc,


Your latest build looks awesome.

Regards,
Alex

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: TD replications
« Reply #167 on: March 04, 2017, 10:17:40 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline shylo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 540
Re: TD replications
« Reply #168 on: March 04, 2017, 01:19:41 PM »
Luc Nice build , and thanks for showing the break down and explaining the poles positions.
artv

Offline Floor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2081
Re: TD replications
« Reply #169 on: March 04, 2017, 03:22:04 PM »

All right, so... useing A Cairon design-roary-stop-start input...this could get even more interesting.

@ GotoLuc

Important note

Now that you are using larger magnets, the forces involved may be great enough
that a personal injury could be serious !  Please consider designing and installing
some fool proof safety / locking mechanisms on your new device.

Safety first .... then have as much fun as humanly possible !
...............................................................................................

It looks like you may need lateral support / rollers like that which you were considering
in the bicycle rim device ?

very nice build.

                regards
                     floor

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: TD replications
« Reply #169 on: March 04, 2017, 03:22:04 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline gotoluc

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3096
Re: TD replications
« Reply #170 on: March 04, 2017, 07:11:57 PM »
Thanks Luc for the video, now your results make more sense.
There are several mistakes in your approach and measurements, which may be very well the cause for the detection of COP>1. The biggest mistake is to judge the efficiency of a device based on average forces. That is completely unscientific, and it can very easily mislead you. The total work must be measured and calculated, like in my spreadsheet.

The second mistake is ignoring the role of measurement errors. A measurement is never 100% accurate, there is always some error in it. The experimenter must be aware of the expected maximum error margin of his measurements, and disclose it together with the measurement results. Without this, the data can not be taken seriously. For example the best resolution of your scale is 5g which is extremely low and produces a very large error if you are measuring forces in the range of 0 to 100g. When you are measuring 100g then the uncertainty of the measured result is 10g, which is 10%. The correct way of showing your measurement result is: 100g +-5g, or with other words, the real force could be anything from 100-5=95g to 100+5=105g, the error margin is 105-95=10g, which is 10% of the measured value of 100g. Therefore if you find a COP=1.1 with such large error margin of measurement, then your measurements are pretty much useless to prove anything. If you are measuring even less than 100g, like in some of your measurement series measuring 5, 10, 20g etc. then your error margin is so huge that the data is of no value to prove anything. If your scale has a low resolution, then build a device that requires the measurement of about 100 times larger forces than the 5g resolution. If this is not practical, then use a scale that has got sufficient resolution and accuracy to produce around 1% (or less) measurement error.

The third mistake is not to measure the complete cycle of movement. For example webby1 was trying to convince you few pages back that you have to measure the 4th part of the cycle as well, in one of your earlier devices. He finally succeeded in this effort in post:
http://overunity.com/16987/td-replications/msg496971/#msg496971 and you provided the data in:
http://overunity.com/16987/td-replications/msg496974/#msg496974
After you have measured this 4th part of the cycle and taken it into account, then your (still incorrect) averaging calculations showed only 10% of excess work, which can very easily attributed to the other mistakes already mentioned.

In this case of rotary device this is not as critical as in the previous devices, but I would still recommend you to measure the complete cycle. Meaning, two rotary magnets pass in sequence above the slider. Please also measure the output force as well at least 10 times, like after each 1mm movement.

I was trying to get a manual feel of the forces in your device using two neodymium magnets of 4x2x1cm, which I don’t recommend to anyone. These magnets are just too powerful, and if one doesn’t have very strong fingers, they can also harm you! But, I have got no ceramic magnets of rectangular shape right now, so can not do the safe version.

Anyway, keep up the good work, and if the COP is still higher than say 1.2 even after fixing these mistakes, then it should be possible to build at least a perpetuum mobile using this magnet arrangement. If the COP would be really 1.6 like in your measurements, then the machine should be able to generate useful output power as well, besides just running itself.

Thanks Floor for the links and the drawing.


Hi Nonlinear

Thanks for your post.

I've been aware of the scales 5 gram resolution limitation and agree it's not ideal for small measurements.
The errors % margin will be greatly reduced with the version 2 build as the scale will be in the Kg measurement ranges.

Lets see what these new numbers will show.

Regards

Luc

Offline Nonlinear

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 20
Re: TD replications
« Reply #171 on: March 04, 2017, 09:31:03 PM »
If you have the time, I would like to talk over / better understand your suggested approach.  Maybe in the topic
http://overunity.com/16954/magnets-motion-and-measurement/

I don't think it is a good idea to separate the discussion of measurement techniques from the experimental thread (here) where the action happens. There is a good chance that those who experiment and supposed to read and implement the suggestions will not find them. Like in this post:
http://overunity.com/16954/magnets-motion-and-measurement/msg499599/#msg499599
telecom has explained how to measure and correctly calculate the input and output work already on the 9th February. His suggestion was ignored and the averaging continued as if nothing happened. If you ignore good advice then why would anyone be willing to help?

Anyway, if you don't' understand telecom's explanation, then I can explain it again. What is it that you don't understand?

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: TD replications
« Reply #171 on: March 04, 2017, 09:31:03 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline gotoluc

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3096
Re: TD replications
« Reply #172 on: March 04, 2017, 10:54:03 PM »

I would tend to agree with you Nonlinear. Better keep the measurement techniques of a replication in this topic.


Now, concerning telecom's advice "below"


"Re Gotoluc measurements:
work = force x distance
I would like  Gotoluc to measure force for each segment of his input
and output dials, and multiply this force by the length of the segment.
Then add them together for the input and output.
This will give us input and output work.
The more segments he has, the more precise would be the calculations.
In fact, he already has everything in place, just needs to do the above
operations."


I do remember reading it and re-read but can't seem to understand or find what I have not provided.
So I guess you'll have to explain what I have not done.
BTW, your calculations came to the same as I had calculated, so again I fail to see what I forgot.

Kind regards

Luc

Offline Floor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2081
Re: TD replications
« Reply #173 on: March 05, 2017, 02:25:27 AM »
@Nonlinear

A request of / upon Telecom by floor
@
http://overunity.com/16987/td-replications/msg499531/#msg499531 

Telecom's rseponce next day
@
http://overunity.com/16954/magnets-motion-and-measurement/msg499599/#msg499599


Have I given a correct interpretation of the basics of the process for calculating the
work in these magnet interactions here ........
           
     @       http://overunity.com/14311/work-from-2-magnets-19-output-2/msg498005/#msg498005        ?

  If so, and with your permission :)  ..... then I will re post those three pages / files here ?


A COP of 161.2838 .... does this mean basically the same thing as 61.2838 % more out
than in ?


             thanks
                 floor

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: TD replications
« Reply #173 on: March 05, 2017, 02:25:27 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline verpies

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3465
Re: TD replications
« Reply #174 on: March 05, 2017, 12:31:39 PM »
I do remember reading it and re-read but can't seem to understand or find what I have not provided.
I just popped in here without reading the entire thread.

Please give me some links to your work, in which you had summed the force*distance for the input and output of your system, so I can evaluate it.
If I notice anything you have omitted or any errors, I'll let you know.

Offline gotoluc

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3096
Re: TD replications
« Reply #175 on: March 05, 2017, 03:50:13 PM »

I just popped in here without reading the entire thread.

Please give me some links to your work, in which you had summed the force*distance for the input and output of your system, so I can evaluate it.
If I notice anything you have omitted or any errors, I'll let you know.

Hi verpies,

Nice to see you here.

The below videos (in order) relate to the around 60% over unity

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oUlDMY1iE5A

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dpBaeJD38HI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z6sbIgr2L8A


And the below videos are v 2.0 which is a Super build of the above
Just completed the build on Friday so no measurements yet.
I'll have to bolt down this beast to measure her ;)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BMVES42VbzA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OsEbX8yJ91I

Regards

Luc

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: TD replications
« Reply #175 on: March 05, 2017, 03:50:13 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline dieter

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 938
Re: TD replications
« Reply #176 on: March 05, 2017, 07:31:43 PM »
Nice build. Reminds me a bit of Teslas Earthquake machine tho ^^ Make sure to have a sledge hammer at hand during the test run, in case of any runaway /evac situation.

Offline Floor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2081
Re: TD replications
« Reply #177 on: March 05, 2017, 08:27:47 PM »
@ Nonlinear

Here in PDF (easy to down load / contemplate off line) form is
my responce to your postings. 

Please find the attached file  "MagnetForceIntegration.PDF"

       Thanks for your input
                       best wishes
                                floor

@ all readers
The above PDF file is not a private message.


Offline Nonlinear

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 20
Re: TD replications
« Reply #178 on: March 05, 2017, 08:52:07 PM »
Quote
BTW, your calculations came to the same as I had calculated, so again I fail to see what I forgot.

Here is a parable: Joe and Fred have calculated the surface area of a gate that they want to paint, which is a square. They know how much paint is needed per square meter. So if they calculate the surface area of the gate then they will know how much paint they will have to buy, and how much that will cost. One side of the square is 2m long. Joe calculates the surface area as S=(2[m])^2=2^2[m^2]=4[m^2]. Fred prefers to calculate the same as S=2+2=4.

As you can see in this specific case the numerical result of both calculations are the same (4) and correct, but Fred is calculating it the wrong way. If the length of one side is not 2m but let’s say 3m, then Joe will get a correct result as S=(3[m])^2=9[m^2], but Fred’s result of S=3+3=6 will be wrong. The fact that two different methods of calculation give the same result for a specific case (or even for several specific cases) does not mean that both methods of calculation are equally valid for all possible cases.

Quote
I do remember reading it and re-read but can't seem to understand or find what I have not provided.

You have provided useful measurement data, and doing a great work on testing the energy balance of different magnet arrangements. I did not say that you did not do anything useful, or that you have not provided something essential. Your data already merits serious investigation (if true) and that is the reason I have chimed in and trying to help. Even if it finally turns out that there is no real COP>1 in these permanent magnet arrangements, the measurements are still of value if they are scientifically correct and sufficiently accurate. In such a case future experimenters can already know that it might not be the best idea to look for overunity in this area.

But both your method of setting the measurement points and the method of calculating the COP are not the most scientific and accurate, and therefore not very convincing for the scientifically minded. You can fix this with no extra effort, and obtain/present neat measurement results for the same cost and work spent. The correct approach will also be valid for any possible measurement point distribution.

Quote
So I guess you'll have to explain what I have not done.

You have done it (calculated the COP), just not the right way, which was also suggested by telecom, but now I see that it has been nicely described even earlier on January 04 by Floor:
http://overunity.com/14311/work-from-2-magnets-19-output-2/msg498005/#msg498005

If you read the explanations in the pdf that is attached below this post, you will see that in general case it is not wise to use uniform segment sizes. In the regions where the curvature of the force function that you are measuring is large, one supposed to use small displacement sizes. Where the curve is nearly straight line (nearly constant increase or decrease of force per same displacement) one can use larger displacement increments.

If the segment sizes are not uniform, then your method of simply averaging the forces, and ignoring the lengths of individual displacements will give a wrong final results. It is also wise to conform with the established scientific method of calculating the COP as the ratio of the output and input work (not average forces).

Quote
Have I given a correct interpretation of the basics of the process for calculating the
work in these magnet interactions here ........
http://overunity.com/14311/work-from-2-magnets-19-output-2/msg498005/#msg498005        ?

Yes, except for the minor math error in this formula: Pf+if/2=avf which would be correct in this form Fa=(Fp+Fi)/2. First one must add the two forces together, and then divide the result by 2. Your version first divides Fi by 2 and then adds Fp to it, which gives a wrong result.

Quote
If so, and with your permission    ..... then I will re post those three pages / files here ?

This is your thread, you don’t need my permission. It indeed makes sense to post everything relevant into this thread as well. Although I have also attached a similar pdf document to this message to clarify the calculation methods, yours is also useful, because it explains the subject in more layman terms and it may help those with less technical knowledge. If we want to implement the best method of COP calculation, then I (of someone else) will have to slightly modify the earlier posted spreadsheet as well (but the change is trivially simple).

Quote
A COP of 161.2838 .... does this mean basically the same thing as 61.2838 % more out than in ?

Yes, it does. Whatever you get above 100% is free excess energy.

Offline Floor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2081
Re: TD replications
« Reply #179 on: March 05, 2017, 10:16:38 PM »
QUOTE from Nonlinear

"Yes, except for the minor math error in this formula: Pf+if/2=avf which would be correct
in this form Fa=(Fp+Fi)/2. First one must eadd together the two forces, and th results is
divided by 2. Your version first divided Fi by 2 and then adds Fp to it, which gives a wrong
result."
 
END QUOTE
                                  OK
Average force = (peak force -  initial force) / 2 ............ I see,  previously .... I left out the parentheses.

Force applied = average force    times    displacement.
.........................................
.........................................
note also.... proof reading on the fly often misses errors
e.g.  except for your minor math error

" Pf+if/2=avf which would be correct in this form Fa=(Fp+Fi)/2."
First one must eadd together the two forces, and th results is
divided by 2.

                     should read

(Pf - if)/2=avf which would be correct in this form Fa=(Fp - Fi)/2.
First one must    subtract    the two forces, and the results is
divided by 2.

Corrections are duly noted and requested, welcomed,... this is, in part, why
the subject matter is in a public forum.

However please understand that this is NOT a conventional class room.
You will not be accorded a special status based upon any degrees.

I am neither a math wiz nor an expert in magnets nor physics.
But then neither do I have the kind of brain damage that some times
results from the traditional abuses in the course of academic conditioning.
                       (not that you do either, I don't know ?)
People on this forum, that are here to learn, are here to learn..... 
what, where and why they want to learn .... not your or some other
specific curriculum.

This topic is not a competition, cooperation is the goal.  Many trolls are very knowledgeable.  If you become a disruption to the topic, no matter how cleverly you do so, the topic will become moderated. and posts simple deleted.

You can contribute, but just know that we don't need your "help".
                                Hopeing you can continue to stay involved, sincerely
                                              floor

 

OneLink