GDPR and DSGVO law

Storing Cookies (See : ) help us to bring you our services at . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
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 this way.

User Menu



3D Solar

3D Solar Panels

DC2DC converter

Micro JouleThief







Magpi Magazine

Magpi Magazine Free Rasberry Pi Magazine

Battery Recondition

Battery Recondition



YT Subscribe

Gravity Machines


Magnet Secrets

Lindemann Video




WaterMotor kit


  • *Total Posts: 497631
  • *Total Topics: 14727
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 10
  • *Guests: 25
  • *Total: 35

Author Topic: Rene/Meissner EMF Higher Voltage Charger Variant  (Read 10046 times)

Offline gyulasun

  • without_ads
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3612
Re: Rene/Meissner EMF Higher Voltage Charger Variant
« Reply #120 on: June 11, 2018, 08:55:30 PM »
Hi SkyWatcher,

I reflect on your last but one post above. Well, I did not care about capacitor filter drawing symbol orientation (and please you don't, either), the point is that the two schematics are identical in function and operation.

Yes, the output from the FWB is a pulsing DC voltage and it charges up C2 to the peak value of the AC input voltage. Here we need to be more precise and distinguish between the pulsing current that charges up C2 and the pulsing voltage across C2, see attachment I took from this link:  You surely know the remains of the AC voltage across C2 is also called the ripple voltage.
The point is the pulsing current flows into the puffer or (reservoir) capacitor (C2) and it is the ripple voltage which will be fed into the series coils and notice that this voltage has no sharp waveforms to make the coils field collapse in the sense we normally mean pulsing a coil. The ripple voltage has the same frequency the AC input has when we half wave rectify as shown and it has twice the input AC frequency when we full wave rectify the input AC, waveforms are in the bottom part.

All I mean is that the rectified voltage or current does not pulse the two (Muller) coils, the current is never interrupted in them by the charge or discharge of C2 or of C3 and the DC output amplitude can only fluctuate a little in the function of the ripple voltage amplitude, while the ripple amplitude depends on the load current. Of course if the load current is suddenly interrupted, then the coils surely respond to that by a counter emf but it is a single moment and the coils stored energy goes into the capacitors which balance and share the spike, then all the charge may bleed away from the caps in time. 

Regarding your latest test you updated :  when the two coils are in series and do not have mutual inductive coupling between them, their self inductances add up, so their captured collapsing energy is surely higher than for a single coil or bucking coils, provided the supply voltage conditions are comparable voltage and input current wise.  I say this, and you are leaning toward the explanation of the higher efficiency being caused by the greater mass of copper.  We can be both happy...   I mean also with this here that a coil with higher number of turns (i.e. your added two coils) possesses a greater mass of copper.   8)


Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy