Author Topic: Confirmation of OU devices and claims (Read 550957 times)

conradelektro · « **Reply #270 on:** April 26, 2019, 07:43:11 PM »

Quote from: a.king21 on April 26, 2019, 07:20:01 PM

I woud be very careful about reprinting something which may or may not be true. In England recently someone was jailed for 2 years for putting out revenge pornography. Making posts with no evidence except citing someone else can be both a civil and criminal offence and you won't catch me doing it.
There have also been cases where people have put out fake likes and dislikes being taken to court. The internet is changing fast and hiding behind handles is no longer accepted or tolerated.
I woud prefer responsible discussions on the technology being described rather than character assassinations.

Nice try! Come up with some evidence instead!

It is a crime to claim impossible things. It is no crime to doubt impossible things. Only spammers and frauds threaten doubters. Real men provide proof.

Greetings, Conrad

itsu · « **Reply #271 on:** April 26, 2019, 09:47:05 PM »

Quote from: benfr on April 24, 2019, 11:27:32 AM

Hello Guys !
Why not take a simple working recipe and build from there ?
Rick Friedrich has shown a great tool of how to produce easy overunity on this video :https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=18kOGVfkoik
how to produce a multiplication of voltage , or amperage, or both.
How is that done and possible ?
Well, I am going to help you build one in a single hour's time below.
What you can also do, to be safely and thoroughly taught by Mr Friedrich, is get his "kit" : the "resonant inductive coupler kit" that comes with a 3 hours video to show you what is OU out of the simplest recipe on earth.

For our friends in any other country in the world, who do not have 100 USD to spend, and who may have a bit of cables , and can spend a few dollars in a few electronic parts, I am going to show you what is shown in the RICK kit, without departing, as said Tesla, from the interest of buying it.
I. You will build 3 coils which are as follows :
- 2,5 centimeter diameter (a plumber plastic should be around this and work even at 3 or 4 centimeter).
- 0.5 mm to 2 mm width for the wire
- 54 to 57 turns.
inductance : around 157 uF.

get 3 "100 pF" capacitors.

II. put all those in series :
x capacitor>coil>capacitor>coil>capacitor>coil y

III. send a SQUARE frequency of 863 KHZ at 11 to 15 volts at x and y points.
the frequency can be approximately deduced from well established formulaes, for instance :
https://goodcalculators.com/resonant-frequency-calculator/

IV. put a 100 V bulb anywhere across several points in this circuit, for instance on x and y .
it lights brigthly : voltage has been mutiplied by a factor of around X7, so a Q=7, so a 700% factor multiplier for voltage.

V. remark : the amperage stays the same.

You may now Thank Rick Friedrich for creating this kit in hommage to Don Smith, which I highly recommend to buy (100 USD).

Key words : Tesla, resonance , Tesla lecture 1893, high frequency, Rick Friedrich, resonance coupling, overunity, voltage multiplication, amperage multiplication.

Benfr,

According to this website (and my experience), the given coil data does not match:
http://hamwaves.com/inductance/en/index.html#input

Quote

- 2,5 centimeter diameter (a plumber plastic should be around this and work even at 3 or 4 centimeter).
- 0.5 mm to 2 mm width for the wire
- 54 to 57 turns.
inductance : around 157 uF.

At 0.5mm wire width, the inductance comes at ~49uH
At 2mm wire width, the inductance comes at ~14uH.

So both are way off from your 157uH.

So what is the goal, the 157uH inductance, the number of turns, the length of the coils or?

Further, do we need it to be in resonance? You did not say, but kind of hinted at it by giving the "resonant frequency calculator" link.
By the way when using that calculator, i get with 157uH and 100pF a resonance frequency of 1270Khz, so what is that about 863Khz SQUARE to tune to?

Anyway, i build your little circuit in a simulator (LTspice) and used the following:
100pf caps
157uH coils
166 Ohm load as bulb
square wave (50% duty cycle) signal 15Vpp (AC).

The signal across the bulb / square wave source looks like the green trace (nice 15Vpp square wave signal).
No way to get a 100V bulb lightning up i think.
See first picture.
Is that circuit the one you had in mind?

I then really build that circuit (coils 163uH / 106 turns / 0.45mm wire) and using 15Vpp square wave 50% duty cycle and a 220V 25W bulb.
Needless to say that the bulb never lighted up.
Below a screenshot of the signal at 863Khz (blue) and at resonance which is 1224Khz in my case (white).

what am i doing wrong? Are you having better results? Please show.

(The file 3 coils.png is the LTspice sim file, please rename to 3 coil.asc to use in LTspice)

Itsu

AlienGrey · « **Reply #272 on:** April 27, 2019, 12:07:26 AM »

Itsu, i'm a bit of a novice on this but from what i know doesn't the C value and the L value of 'impedance need to be the same for both items ie Rc and Lc ? for your selected frequency? Hmm, hows your formula knowledge and maths?

https://ncalculators.com/electronics/reactance-calculator.htm
working out inductive and capacitance reactance impudance

oops meant impedance

I will leave you to it it's good fun (if you have the time to wast). guys don't realize what's involved in this so-called zero point

have fun and good luck.

gyulasun · « **Reply #273 on:** April 27, 2019, 12:57:17 AM »

Hi AlienGrey,

You have a little bit unusual approach to bring an L inductance and a C capacitance to resonance. It is ok that at resonance
the L and C will have identical reactance values (which cancel) but you do not need to use such approach. And no doubt,
you can arrive at your goal by using the reactance calculator and iterate values for matching the two reactances.
Simply you can instead use online LC resonance calculator (that are based on the Thomson formula) which gives the resonant frequency
the moment you punch the L and C value into it. And then the reactances at the resonant frequencies will surely be equal.

Member benfr included a link to such calculator in his post and here is another one:
https://www.allaboutcircuits.com/tools/tank-circuit-resonance-calculator/ Just enter 100 pF and 163 uH (that was Itsu's actual coil inductance
he used) and you get 1247 kHz, pretty close to his scope measurement of 1224 kHz (see his white trace data on the right). If you read and understand, the problem Itsu noticed and asked was the coil data (number of turns, coil OD) member
benfr provided does not give 157 uH inductance but much less. This is one main point, ok?

Peace
Gyula

Quote from: AlienGrey on April 27, 2019, 12:07:26 AM

Itsu, i'm a bit of a novice on this but from what i know doesn't the C value and the L value of 'impedance need to be the same for both items ie Rc and Lc ? for your selected frequency? Hmm, hows your formula knowledge and maths?

https://ncalculators.com/electronics/reactance-calculator.htm
working out inductive and capacitance reactance impudance oops meant impedance

I will leave you to it it's good fun (if you have the time to wast). guys don't realize what's involved in this so-called zero point have fun and good luck.

AlienGrey · « **Reply #274 on:** April 27, 2019, 02:13:13 AM »

Quote from: gyulasun on April 27, 2019, 12:57:17 AM

Hi AlienGrey,

You have a little bit unusual approach to bring an L inductance and a C capacitance to resonance. It is ok that at resonance
the L and C will have identical reactance values (which cancel) but you do not need to use such approach. And no doubt,
you can arrive at your goal by using the reactance calculator and iterate values for matching the two reactances.
Simply you can instead use online LC resonance calculator (that are based on the Thomson formula) which gives the resonant frequency
the moment you punch the L and C value into it. And then the reactances at the resonant frequencies will surely be equal.

Member benfr included a link to such calculator in his post and here is another one:
https://www.allaboutcircuits.com/tools/tank-circuit-resonance-calculator/ Just enter 100 pF and 163 uH (that was Itsu's actual coil inductance
he used) and you get 1247 kHz, pretty close to his scope measurement of 1224 kHz (see his white trace data on the right). If you read and understand, the problem Itsu noticed and asked was the coil data (number of turns, coil OD) member
benfr provided does not give 157 uH inductance but much less. This is one main point, ok?

Peace
Gyula

Hi wasn't aware impedance matching was the same as resonant frequency as one can get multiple points of resonance with a coil scope and signal gen, not to wory though.

While your on can i pick your brains on NE555 any idea how i can get a 50/50 waveform out of a 555 without having to keep adjusting it with another pot and a diode or using a D type at double the frequency as I need a span of 30khz to 80 khz ?

Grumage · « **Reply #275 on:** April 27, 2019, 12:37:47 PM »

Hi Itsu.

Many thanks for " actually/physically " building this device.

How were your 3 coils oriented to each other for the test?

Is it possible for you to try say one coil in a vertical position WRT the others?

The term " electromagnetic " has been bandied about, I'm wondering about " interaction " and possibly the physical separation distance of the coils might have an influence?

Cheers Graham.

itsu · « **Reply #276 on:** April 27, 2019, 01:14:07 PM »

Hi Grum,

the 3 coils are initially vertically positioned, but are flexible, see picture.

I did try severall positions and distances, but mostly the resonance frequency is influenced by that, not
the output amplitude or signal shape.

Thats why i am asking if i am doing something wrong and if this is the circuit Benfr has in mind.

Itsu

Grumage · « **Reply #277 on:** April 27, 2019, 01:30:28 PM »

Quote from: itsu on April 27, 2019, 01:14:07 PM

Hi Grum,

the 3 coils are initially vertically positioned, but are flexible, see picture.

I did try severall positions and distances, but mostly the resonance frequency is influenced by that, not
the output amplitude or signal shape.

Thats why i am asking if i am doing something wrong and if this is the circuit Benfr has in mind.

Itsu

Many thanks Itsu.

Did you try with one coil laid horizontal WRT the others?

gyulasun · « **Reply #278 on:** April 27, 2019, 02:30:03 PM »

Quote from: AlienGrey on April 27, 2019, 02:13:13 AM

...
While your on can i pick your brains on NE555 any idea how i can get a 50/50 waveform out of a 555 without having to keep adjusting it with another pot and a diode or using a D type at double the frequency as I need a span of 30khz to 80 khz ?

Hey AG,

LOL Just a brief answer because your question is off topic here: if you use a Schmitt trigger oscillator
with either TTL, CMOS, HCMOS etc chips you will have achieved your goal, see this link:
http://www.learningaboutelectronics.com/Articles/7414-oscillator-calculator.php
If you use say C = 1 nF and R = 25 kOhm potmeter in series with a 15 kOhm fix resistor, the upper frequency
would be 80 kHz (when the potmeter is fully shorted) and 30 kHz when the potmeter is set to 25 kOhm
(so total R would be 15+25=40kOhm). Further possibility is using a 10 kOhm potmeter in series with
a 5 kOhm fix resistor when C=3 nF (2x 1.5nF in parallel) etc etc. You will have a 50% duty cycle.
25 kOhm potmeters are at RS Components etc. Of course you can play with the calculator in the link
to figure out other values for your potmeters at hand.

Gyula

itsu · « **Reply #279 on:** April 27, 2019, 04:02:21 PM »

Quote from: Grumage on April 27, 2019, 01:30:28 PM

Many thanks Itsu.

Did you try with one coil laid horizontal WRT the others?

Hi Grum,

yes, i did just now again and all kind of other combinations.
The load of the FG (50 Ohm) and the load of my bulb (100 Ohm cold) will dampen the resonance.

Only the resonance frequency shifts when changing distance and/or coil positions (horizontal/vertical)

Itsu

a.king21 · « **Reply #280 on:** April 28, 2019, 04:09:23 AM »

Itsu,The whole point is transmission and reception of electricity at resonance. You should have one transmitter coil and any number of resonantly tuned receiver coils. Series tank resonance is most effective because you should see a voltage gain whilst the input amperage and circulating series tank amperage should remain the same. That's the whole point of this exercise. It's two fingers at Kirchhoff's law .
At a certain distance from the transmitter the frequency remains stable. Then you can place an unlimited number of receiver coils IN THREE DIMENSIONS and receive approximately 40% of the power per receiver according to the claim. The claim is superconductivity at room temperature at RESONANCE. At 18 volts into the gate driver the output voltage should increase 144 times whilst the amperage stays the same on both the input amperage and amperage inside the series tank.
I am sure you know what this claim means.
You also need a gaussmeter in order to see the magnetic field in three dimensions. The proper name is magnetic resonance and is the basis of Don Smith's work.
According to the claim most EE students assume that as the voltage rises the amperage falls and that is where the big con exists. Do the experiment and find out - is the next big test of the claim.

The receiver coils should not be electrically connected to the transmitter coil in any way. They should be freestanding in the same way that a radio is not connected to the transmitter except by resonance ( ie tuning).

You need some variable capacitors, and < 100 pf work in the 1.25 Mhz range. If you go into the Khz you are gonna need bigger variable caps and they get very expensive.

You also need to experiment with grounding the receiver coils in the same way Tesla did. What happens when you ground the receiver coils? Another little surprise coming...
Suddenly Don Smith and Kapanadze seem credible.

IonLady · « **Reply #281 on:** April 28, 2019, 05:05:31 AM »

Good Info!!!

a.king21 · « **Reply #282 on:** April 28, 2019, 05:44:38 AM »

ITSU: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BHr3eDELyHk&t=6499s at 1 hour 44 minutes onwards is Don Smith showing the transmission/receiving device. Rick's kit is minus the L2 coil and is safer than Don Smith's.

a.king21 · « **Reply #283 on:** April 28, 2019, 05:52:18 AM »

Itsu: Here is a screenshot of the device Rick has replicated.

itsu · « **Reply #284 on:** April 28, 2019, 10:53:46 AM »

Hi a.king21,

what you are describing is a total different setup as what Benfr has presented and what i am replicating.

I know all about the Don Smit fantasy circuits as when i started with this FE stuff about 10 years ago he
was the first one i stumbled on.

I spend months then understanding / replicating, but finally give up on it, with reason.

Anyway, the present Benfr setup does not work for me and i am awaiting for him to show his results.

Regards Itsu

News:

User Menu

Author Topic: Confirmation of OU devices and claims (Read 550957 times)

conradelektro

Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims

itsu

Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims

AlienGrey

Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims

gyulasun

Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims

AlienGrey

Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims

Grumage

Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims

itsu

Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims

Grumage

Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims

gyulasun

Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims

itsu

Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims

a.king21

Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims

IonLady

Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims

a.king21

Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims

a.king21

Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims

itsu

Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims