Hi avalon,

Thanks for the info.  If you are still in contact with the author, please tell him to change the text that says the experiments show the Huber effect makes the self rotation of a generator possible. It is rather misleading, to say the least.

Thanks, 
Gyula

My information doesn't come from the Web site. I have been in touch with the author directly. He wrote to me that

Also, the the author admitted that using the Guber effect in the current setup lowered the efficiency considerably.

So I think that a pulse driver should have been used instead. I have also suggested a different approach to the magnet holders to get rid of (or, at least to minimize) the eddy currents.

Overall, I am as disappointed with the results as the author.

Konehead:

Yes, when you add extra magnets to a pulse motor it may speed up or it may slow down.  The current draw may increase or it may decrease.  You are changing the configuration of the motor so it is not surprising that the behaviour changes also.

The real question is is this change in configuration and resulting change in behaviour significant in any way?  The answer to that question is no, it's not significant.  By changing the configuration of the motor you change the electro-mechanical impedance of the motor and as a result it behaves differently.

The lesson here is that when you first have results that look exciting, you then need to take a second more thoughtful and more balanced look at your data to see if there really is something there.  The reality is that all RomeroUK replications are under unity, only a fraction of the available battery power becomes rotor power.  The fact that changing the configuration of the motor can change the balance between waste heat power and rotor power is not significant.

The MIB story is just a tall tale as far as I am concerned.  There have been no positive results and nobody ever made a self-runner like they were hoping.  There is nothing special about the RomeroUK Muller motor configuration.

MileHigh

Hi MileHigh!

I hear well your objections on RomeroUK Muller replication, but may I ask you something:

If in a unplug system, I mean off the grid, we have 2 batteries, 1 to feed the motor side of the motor-generator, and the number 2 been feed by the generator side.

Assuming the batteries identical, if the voltage of the number 2 feed grows faster than the voltage drop in the number 1, would you recognize an overunity in the system?

Regards, Khwartz.

Hi Guys,
How about this?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xZDBtFLotbg&feature=player_detailpage

Hi Guys,
How about this?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xZDBtFLotbg&feature=player_detailpage

I am afraid I have to agree with MileHigh.
I have been playing a lot with rotoverters. In fact I have a pair of the very same motor (Baldor E-Series) so I do know the effect.
It is fairly normal for a rotoverter to lower current draw with load if you have tuned it first. I have a battery of capacitors and can find an even more pronounced drop for a particular load. The problem is that the current will go back up if the load changes in any way.

As far as the dual battery approach is concerned, I do not see higher charging battery voltage as overunity. A while back I've produced a dual battery push-pull inverter (a Ossie Callanan flavour) which works (with a 220VAC 15 W load) for nearly 2 days on a pair of freshly charged 12V 7Ah batteries. On one hand it seems like an overunity setup with higher charging voltages but I can assure you that, sadly, it is not.

T-1000:

I doubt that my comments will resonate with you because you dismissed them once before but here goes.

Thane called the first clip, "PART 1 "Thane Heins" ReGenX Generator Replication by Independent Dutch Engineer."  That guy is not an engineer, he is a beginning experimenter.

I already stated that there is nothing of merit in the first clip, you can see my earlier comments.  Note that he is using a pulse-width-modulator to simulate a sine wave to drive the motor.  That's actually a nightmare if you want to make some measurements on the motor itself, which he does in some other clips.

The second clip is completely wrong.  He discusses the time constant for energizing a coil which is L/R.  That has nothing to do with using a coil in a generator configuration.   When a magnet passes a coil as in a generator, what you have is EMF induced in the coil and that drives the load, which consists of the coil resistance and the load resistance.  In this case Lenz drag acts at the speed of light because magnetic fields interact at the speed of light.

Any serious attempt at explaining any observed generator effects would require the development of a timing diagram.

Then we can go straight to the point with correct frequency

There is no such thing as a "correct frequency," I can feel you wishing that was true.  The faster the rotor magnets pass the generator coils the higher the EMF generated in the coils and the higher the power transferred into the load and the higher the Lenz drag.  That's simply the way it works.  There are no "timing tricks" or special formulas for the "correct" frequency.

MileHigh

T-1000:

I doubt that my comments will resonate with you because you dismissed them once before but here goes.

Thane called the first clip, "PART 1 "Thane Heins" ReGenX Generator Replication by Independent Dutch Engineer."  That guy is not an engineer, he is a beginning experimenter.

I already stated that there is nothing of merit in the first clip, you can see my earlier comments.  Note that he is using a pulse-width-modulator to simulate a sine wave to drive the motor.  That's actually a nightmare if you want to make some measurements on the motor itself, which he does in some other clips.

The second clip is completely wrong.  He discusses the time constant for energizing a coil which is L/R.  That has nothing to do with using a coil in a generator configuration.   When a magnet passes a coil as in a generator, what you have is EMF induced in the coil and that drives the load, which consists of the coil resistance and the load resistance.  In this case Lenz drag acts at the speed of light because magnetic fields interact at the speed of light.

Any serious attempt at explaining any observed generator effects would require the development of a timing diagram.

There is no such thing as a "correct frequency," I can feel you wishing that was true.  The faster the rotor magnets pass the generator coils the higher the EMF generated in the coils and the higher the power transferred into the load and the higher the Lenz drag.  That's simply the way it works.  There are no "timing tricks" or special formulas for the "correct" frequency.

MileHigh

Actually, although I agree with most of your statement, I also have to disagree with you to some extent. Whilst I agree that no OU will ever come from simply running a generator at a higher frequency (rpm) than is the norm, the frequency of rotation does indeed have a great impact on the output characteristics of the coil. If inductors were perfect then the reaction between them and a changing rotating magnetic field would be instantaneous. But inductors are not perfect. There is a lag between changes in an inductors core induced field and that of the changing magnetic field from the rotating magnet.

On top of that, when a coil is shorted, if the inductive reactance (at the frequency of rotation ) is greater than the resistance of the coil, then a current lag within the coil will occur, further compounding the lag in the change of the inductor core's induced field.
The combination of the magnetic (change) lag caused by core material/s properties, and the lag in current induced in the coil by the reactance/resistance ratio, will cause the core's induced magnetic field to lag to such a degree, that the core effectively becomes magnetically 'masked' to the magnetic field of the passing magnets.

This will cause the rotor to seemingly accelerate. It is not true acceleration, because the cores are not adding torque to the system, but instead, their magnetic drag is neutralised, thus reducing the braking effect of the cores, which in turn allows the rotor to turn faster.

Thane refuses to acknowledge that his cores are acting as a breaking mechanism due to drag, until they are placed under heavy load or short circuit.

He also seems to think he is the great discoverer of this effect, which has actually been known since Tesla. He also insists that you need high inductance (lots of turns) to make this happen. This is not the case. I (and many others) have achieved this sort of acceleration using coils comprising of only a 100 or so turns, with a resistance of less than 0.5 ohms.

Thane was repeatedly asked to perform a baseline experiment where the power input to his motor that drives his rotor was measured while no cores were present, so that a comparison can be made between the power consumed when running his rotor with no load, then when he has a short circuit on the coils, and when the coils were not present at all. This he refused to do. He claimed that when the coils were present and shorted, the motor/rotor assembly ran faster with less power than when there were no coils present at all, but he refused to actually show this comparison.

Members such as I_ron and Baratolougas reproduced his version of device and did run the comparison tests, which showed conclusively that no extra energy was being generated by the output coils, and that the 'acceleration' under heavy load is an illusion caused by the negation of the core drag of the output coils. I_ron in particular did an experiment which showed that, at the threshold frequency (and beyond), the induced magnetic field of the generator coils actually reverse polarity when the generator coil is shorted, compared to the polarity of field when the coil is only bearing a small electrical load.

Cheers from Hoptoad

hi all
Everyone can see and agree that a single iron core causes lots of rotational-drag in first place against a rotor of many neodimum mangets, and then Thane's approach (or anything similar) make it so the cores dont cause this rotational-drag anymore from that ferrous core against the rotor magnets, and something very interesting is this neutralization of the core's rotational-drag only occurs when there is a very heavy load applied on the coils too -  so nothing wrong with that is there?  Why all the complaints?
If he didnt invent it, or it is already known doesnt matter - it works  or it doesnt work, and it does work since lots of people have replicated it.
...any "extra power" is from the extra RPMS making some extra power, since this whole effect is dealing with a rotating generator rotor stuffed with magnets spinning past coils with ferrous cores...and power produced is very much dependent on the RPMS of the rotor...
the fact it doesnt SLOW under load (as "it should") is one very good thing - as that rotor slowing under a resistive load, as it normally in textbook-fashion will do,  and this also means you lose LOTS of power that "could be" generated by the spinning rotor when it slows down under a resitive load to the coil(s)
and its another very good thing if rotor speeds up - now you dont get the loss of power from the slower RPM rotor from that first obvious good thing happening,
and NOW you get some extra power too, from the increased RPMS...
I dont see what all the complaints are about - its all good... all good that is if if for some reason you were forced to make a generator with a single iron core inside a singel coil against a rotor of many neodimium magnets...

What I would like to see someone do as experiment some day, is a Muller-type generator, with for example 16 neo magnets in flat rotor, and 15 or 17 coils (not 16!) with ferrous cores ((ferrite probably) on each side of this rotor...have the coils wound around the cores be in Thane-fashion, (high impedance or whatever works already for you with a single core and coil in a previous experiment) - where the core's rotational-drag are nuetralized at a certain rpm of the rotor with that heavy load applied ...
for example Woopy did a good video with a single 37.5ohm coil, with iron core, and rotor of 16 magnets whirls past at the 1500rpm-range and he gets some dramatic speed up when coil is shorted-out continuously....SO,  make a mullergen, just like this, same ohms to the coils, same number of magnets in rotor, and make it go same rpms...BUT have either 15 or 17 of these coils with cores on each side of the rotor of 16 magnets.
If things go well, theoretically you should get a huge speed up, under a heavy load on each of the coils, with the resulting huge increase in power from the much higher RPMs... (what happened with Romero too)
..of course the "rotational latching" of all those iron cores, has already been "nuetralized' quite a bit by the odd vs even Mullergen design too........ (everyone by now on this Muller-thread knows how well this works to cut down on rotational-drag)
Actually this is all that "bugs me" about Thane - in his video demos, he always shows just one coil, one core, and rotor of around 16 magnets....why doesnt he step it up to multiple cores and magnets in the Muller odd vs even design    Seems the obvious next step to try.
 
 

Hi Hoptoad
To make a  resisitive load (not shorted-out coil) resemble or mimic the heavy-handed "usually-lugging" effects of a shorted coil, you would need a resistive load of around 1 or 2 ohms - so a very heavy resistive load....
There have been a few people who have substituted a heavy resistive load like that in their Thane or Romero replications, for the "the shorted coil" effect, and it gives the same speed-up effect as a short, so this again is ALL GOOD...
yes a shorted coil is not making any power at all, but a 1ohm load means alot of power is being made (lots of amps not so much voltage)
And one thing that resembles/mimics a load of around 1 or 2 ohms is a very big UF value capacitor.....so you know where I am going with this eh!
Disconnect that capacitor from the "source" when it hits a load too (two-stage or diode plug type output circuit) ....so the only thing that causes worry (and/or lugging) when load is applied to a discharging capacitor, is the next stage, (or the previous stage) of the "filling-up" of the capacitor...
and if the rotor speeds up when a very big capacitor is filled, then once again, its ALL GOOD...
have the load be a motor, or motor coils, that is spinning the generator rotor..
have two motors run by cap-discharge, and two generators that "speed up" while filling up caps.... fill one with the other...