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

Plug Heater

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 Posts: 502908
  • *Total Topics: 15032
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 8
  • *Guests: 28
  • *Total: 36

Author Topic: Pierre's 170W in 1600W out Looped Very impressive Build continued & moderated  (Read 103883 times)

Offline listener192

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 176
You don't elaborate, but going by the filenames of the scopeshots you provided, I see an average INPUT POWER of 432 watts and an average OUTPUT POWER (presumably using the 100W bulb as load) of 6.15 watts.

Is that right?




Hopefully, everybody is beginning to understand much better now.
Yes that is correct.
L192

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy


Offline seaad

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 197
You don't elaborate, but going by the filenames of the scopeshots you provided, I see an average INPUT POWER of 432 watts and an average OUTPUT POWER (presumably using the 100W bulb as load) of 6.15 watts.
Is that right?

Hopefully, everybody is beginning to understand much better now.

https://overunity.com/17609/170-watts-in-1600-watts-out-looped-very-impressive-build-and-video/msg518537/#msg518537

Offline listener192

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 176
Nicely done. For those not familiar with ratiometric Hall probes we might say that this will give a signal that goes from 0V to 5V, with 2.5 V being the "zero flux" baseline, and lower voltages indicate flux in one direction and higher voltages in the other direction. So just as you say the gap sensor is indicating a sinusoidally varying flux, just as intended.

However.... could you not also achieve this exact same effect with only two stator coils, on opposite ends of the rotor, with two H-bridges and PWM?  You probably couldn't get to 60Hz this way using relays but you certainly could with electronic switching.

And I'll bet it would be a lot more efficient than the full version, too.
Attached are two output scope shots using coils 1-16  so two poles rotating in 30 steps.This is the asymmetric waveform I mentioned.
Notice that at the higher clock rate the current reduces compared to the 6 pole scheme clocked at a much lower rate.
This will be a problem for the higher clock rates required to achieve 50/60Hz. The pulse period is not long enough to achieve maximum current with only 25V. Higher voltages would allow a faster rise time.
In the 6 pole version, each of the 5 series coil  groups is providing 35T x 5 coils x 20A =3500 A/Turns, so x 2 between poles =7000 A/Turns. That is a lot of potential flux, which is obviously not being developed due to overlapped coils of opposite polarity.

Irrespective of a missing element (secret), it is difficult to see how the original relay configuration could have developed such output power, with the flux wastage present in this configuration.

L192

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Sponsored links:




Offline r2fpl

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 176
Yes, 1 coil produces a much higher output however, it is just flux linkage as per a transformer.
L192

A lot depends on the correct work frequency! therefore, combining the coils will also have the same relationship.

Offline FixedSys

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 30
However.... could you not also achieve this exact same effect with only two stator coils, on opposite ends of the rotor, with two H-bridges and PWM?

Interesting question.
My understanding (or lack thereof) is that the aim is to move (rotate in this instance) the flux lines to "cut" the armature coils, i.e. move the strongest part of the flux through and across as much of the coil as possible.
A two coil configuration would appear to cut in only two spots. If my understanding is indeed correct, then it implies that resolution of the reproduction of the moving flux is crucial, i.e. the higher the resolution, the more movement can be simulated.

Makes me wonder if Nyquist frequency would apply here? i.e. 50Hz would ideally be achieved with 100 coils.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Sponsored links:




Offline r2fpl

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 176
What did Pierre mean by the secret element? give your types

I can say that slot filling can be a ferrite powder to increase the inductance of the coil, and it can also be a ferrite magnet powder or it does not mean anything and it is a rubber in the spray.

There is something else else but I am waiting for your opinions.

Offline listener192

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 176
What did Pierre mean by the secret element? give your types

I can say that slot filling can be a ferrite powder to increase the inductance of the coil, and it can also be a ferrite magnet powder or it does not mean anything and it is a rubber in the spray.

There is something else else but I am waiting for your opinions.
No element means feature in this instance, not substance.
I don't know what critical feature is missing.

L192

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Sponsored links:




Offline Jeg

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1199

En.  ....except the link you posted is about a motor with a rotating magnet. Of course you can make the current like that, except my principle is the reverse. It's the field of the stator that rotate....

And the magnet is stationary???? Is there any case for a magnet inside the fixed rotor coil's core???

Offline r2fpl

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 176
No element means feature in this instance, not substance.
I don't know what critical feature is missing.

L192

It may be helpful but not critical.

ok. Look first video at 6:30  Do you see something that you have not seen before? because it's not very visible?

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy


Offline T-1000

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1631
And the magnet is stationary? ??? Is there any case for a magnet inside the fixed rotor coil's core???
Traditionally we rotate magnet on rotor for creating rotating magnetic field. In Pierre's sentence it was about giving this task to stator electromagnets for doing same job.
Almost like in induciton motor but with switching coils on paralel electromagnets.
And for example, if you can have multiple |electromagnet|electromagnet|electromagnet|electromagnet| (where "|" is core extension to output core) style coils with all of them linking to one output core with coil, the 3D position of N/S poles changes every time you activate 1 then 2 electromagnets at once.

Offline gotoluc

  • Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3058
Look first video at 6:30  Do you see something that you have not seen before? because it's not very visible?

There is a camera pause (or video edit) that happens between 6:37 and 6:38

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy


Offline Jeg

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1199
Thanks T1000.
I don't believe either that this is the missing link. I just mentioned it as the guys above talk about a possible missing element. I am more with L192 opinion.

 

Offline r2fpl

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 176
There is a camera pause (or video edit) that happens between 6:37 and 6.38

Sorry, from 6:30-7:10,  What have I noticed here?

Offline listener192

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 176
It may be helpful but not critical.

ok. Look first video at 6:30  Do you see something that you have not seen before? because it's not very visible?
No, why don't you just say what it is?
L192

Offline Jeg

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1199
yes r2fpl it would be more productive. At exactly 06.30 Pierre's nose is getting in to the picture. Until 7.10, i didn't notice anything newer than before. 

By the way. Do you know what this small square thing is? Looks like it is connected across the output. Is it a small bridge for the meter?

 

OneLink