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

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: 498699
  • *Total Topics: 14780
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 11
  • *Guests: 35
  • *Total: 46

Author Topic: Interesting experiment with an transformer, 2 lamps, diodes and an magnet  (Read 45979 times)

Offline PaulLowrance

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2483
    • Global Free Energy
Hi Markus,

Quote
Last night I came up with what I think could be breakthrough in how to extract energy
from the magnetic material. OK, I give my idea perhaps 30% chance of being error free,
but since your device and various others successful magnetic devices seem so similar
to my method I was excited to study your device.
Would you talk about your idea? Mybe we (or better all readers) could learn from each
other and enlarge our knowledge - unless you want to handle it as secret yet.

It's only small chance it's a correct theory/hypothesis, but I'll describe it some more and hopefully not bore everyone.  There's yet another coincidence. Last mentioned, the trick was in trying to extract the energy that is distributed by realigning magnetic moments. I just recently found the trick, which it seems you have already been using, lol. The problem was that the extra energy occurs while the coils current is increasing. But if we place a permanent magnet polarized in the correct direction so that it opposes the coils field then we can extract the extra energy during the opposite cycle. In other words, we can extract the energy during the collapsing field, not on the rise. So what is really happening is that the field is rising, not collapsing, because of the permanent magnet. Basically the reason being is that the permanent magnetic reverses the process.

As to why this may be the case is not easy to describe unless by computer animation. Also it's just a theory / hypothesis not yet backed by mathematics or computer simulations. Basically we have electrons that cause the magnetic field. Most of the field is caused by intrinsic electron spin. These electrons flip during magnetic avalanches. When they flip they convert potential energy into kinetic energy. That is a fact. My theory / hypothesis is that the faster the applied magnetic field rise equates to less energy being absorbed by the electrons neighboring atoms _if_ the circuit takes advantage of it.



Quote
Marcus, I am wondering about some other matches. For example, is your device more
efficient when using rods sa compared to toroids? Also, is your device more efficient
with material that is not too high or too low in permeability?
I tried it with a coil on a ferrite rod, but there is no effect noticable
(effect = increasing kickback energy while the total power consumption drops)

I didn't tried other toroidal core materials, because I own only this kind of ferrite
core. I think I can get a damaged PC-Power supply from a friend. So therin I will
hopefully find some other kinds of ferrite cores to play with (from the step-up
switching circuit).
Are you saying your toroid has the effect but the rod did not? As you know, toroid has much higher _effective_ permeability compared to rods. So it's a matter of permeability. As to the exact values of permeability that the hypothesis predicts I am not sure unless I wrote some advanced simulation program. Initially I the lower permeability might equate to better results, but the permanent magnetic trick changes everything. Basically the idea is the get the magnetic material to switch to a higher state as quickly as possible. Although, faster switching equates to more energy loss-- less efficient. Higher permeability equate to less energy to magnetize the material. So really there should be a happy balance. My concern with toroids is making sure it can switch fast enough.

Presently I would guesstimate that your best material of choice would be laminated transformer iron in the form of a toroid. ***BUT***, presently I cannot see a good method of extracting the extra energy except only by using a permanent magnet. In this case, you would have to insert the permanent magnet inside the toroid in a similar fashion as Tom Bearden's MEG. Wow this is getting exciting and if true then it seems to be linking numerous magnetic devices together.  My problem with the MEG is they use such high permeability material. It's my understanding that such material is very sensitive to changes such as temperature and perhaps even physical shock. According to the hypothesis, the free energy is coming from ambient temperature-- the magnetic material becomes colder. This could cause the device to work just momentarily.

So I am very interested in your results in that which exact demonstrated the free energy effect? It was only the toroid and you never saw any free energy effect with rods?  If that's the case then I'll just concentrate on toroids since I have no simulations of this to guide me.



Maybe the magnet in my setup will cause a faster re-aligning of the magnetic domains
in the toroid core and cause a higher energy emission - same way as you noticed in your
other post? Hmm, but why does it do not work this way with a coil on a normal ferrite rod?
According to the hypothesis, the applied magnetic field from the coil must demonstrate two unit signals. 1. A relatively slow and steady rise in current-- lower di/dt.  2. A sudden change in current in the opposite direction-- high di/dt.  Also, it seems very difficult to extract the extra energy unless you use a permanent magnet to flip the process. This switches the extra energy cycle to the collapsing applied field, which is what you want so that you can extract the energy. In other words, how can you extract energy at the same time you are adding energy. This is why the permanent magnet is so important, or at least I presently see no method of doing both at the same time. The permanent magnet splits the two processes so that you add energy during one half of the cycle and can then extract the extra energy during the other half of the cycle.

OK, that's enough talk on just a hypothesis. Over the next few days I hope to build an appropriate efficient circuit to test this. If it does not work then it could be incorrect hypothesis or simply not the appropriate magnetic material. Only successful device or simulation can decisively determine this. Hopefully tomorrow I'll build the device.

Thanks for listening and for the great help of your device. Let's cross our fingers and hope that the hypothesis can construct an improved device that is good enough to actually run by itself. If it works then I'll fully published and given to humanity. The goal is so that anyone may freely build the device for themselves or even freely build and sale for profit or non-profit as they wish.

Kind regards,
Paul Lowrance

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy


Offline PaulLowrance

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2483
    • Global Free Energy
I tested your pulse circuit in Electronics Work Bench
Hi kingrs,

How do you like Electronics WorkBench?  I'm just using the free LTspice and have to hunt around for models, but I really like it. Have you tried LTspice and if so how does it compare to Electronics WorkBench?

Thanks,
Paul Lowrance

Offline MeggerMan

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 500
Hi Paul,
EWB is OK I suppose, it will stop the simulation some times and I cannot figure out why.
Its good for trying out an idea with actual manufacturer components, it has most of them in its library.
Funny thing: if you simulate a lamp, and drive to much voltage through it, the filament blows and disappears from the diagram.
I did the pulse circuit using a 555 timer 12v supply and iron core coil and a 24v lamp and it blew!

I have a DC-DC converter circuit made up already(built it over 3 years ago on a proper pcb), I just need to wind my toroid and wire it in and I will be ready for testing.
If all goes to plan I will order up some schottky diodes too.

I wanted to have a go at building a MEG device and this seems so simple it will make a good starting point.
I have been following the Hilden-Brand Motor for some time now and experimenting with FEMM 4.0 simulation software and this does a very good job at showing the flux valve in action, but I have yet to prove by simulation if it can give over-unity.
What Markus seems to have done is to drop the supply current and increase the output in the back emf just by externally introducing a magnet, I would never have thought of putting the magnet on the outside, but it gives you a lot of flexability.

The critical thing I found in all my simulations is that too much input power will over-whelm the core material and you will not get over-unity, there seems to be a sweet-spot of input power and flux density of the permanent magnet for a given core material.

Also, a rod will never work as there is no return path for the field, a toroid is the best shape for a return path.
An "EE" core (two "E" shaped pieces of ferrite) is the easiest to wind a coil for and has a good return path.
Farnell has a good choice of "E" cores.
For large toroid cores I plan to use a 0-12v 0-12v mains toroidal transformer and just use the secondary windings as is. The only limit using a mains toroid is the core material may not be suitable for high frequency pulsing.
They do some massive toroids for mains, 1000Watts 7.5kG toroid rated at 40-0v 40-0v at 12.5 A.


Regards

Rob


Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Sponsored links:




Offline PaulLowrance

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2483
    • Global Free Energy
Quote from: kingrs
Hi Paul,
EWB is OK I suppose, it will stop the simulation some times and I cannot figure out why.
Its good for trying out an idea with actual manufacturer components, it has most of them in its library.
Funny thing: if you simulate a lamp, and drive to much voltage through it, the filament blows and disappears from the diagram.
Now that is an accurate circuit sim! :-)


Quote from: kingrs
I have been following the Hilden-Brand Motor for some time now and experimenting with FEMM 4.0 simulation software and this does a very good job at showing the flux valve in action, but I have yet to prove by simulation if it can give over-unity.
Actually if these type of simulators showed over unity then it's flawed, lol.  Truthfully after studying magnetic properties for some time now there is free energy to be gained by ambient temperature, but it can't be put in some simple magnetic math equation. What happens inside magnetic material is a whole universe in itself. It amazes me. Things like avalanche are so complex that modern day computer sims are just beginning to touch it.  But these type of simulators that use Ising models are working on a molecular level (not quite atomic yet) ... something of which FEMM by no means does.

It is possible that a complex Ising model that goes beyond what anything I've seen so far could report thermal energy conversion to electricity. Last year I wrote a similar type of program, but turned out to take about a year just for one simulation. I never completed the sim., which required the addition of ambient temperature.

Ising models don't analyze what's actually going on inside the atom. My non-mathematical hypothesis is actually based on what's happening on this atomic level. Crazy. That's why I give it low odds of being accurate. :( Although I'm just amazed at so many coincidences. In other words, if you just started with the hypothesis from scratch and knew nothing about the MEG or Markus device then you should end up with a device very similar. So are they just coincidences?


Quote from: kingrs
What Markus seems to have done is to drop the supply current and increase the output in the back emf just by externally introducing a magnet, I would never have thought of putting the magnet on the outside, but it gives you a lot of flexability.
Doesn't Markus place a magnet inside a toroid? That's pretty much the same effect that the MEG has. Although Markus coils are different, but over all it's pretty much the same effect IMHO, just a different flavor. I really believe Markus and the MEG are legitimate so-called "free energy" devices.


Quote from: kingrs
The critical thing I found in all my simulations is that too much input power will over-whelm the core material and you will not get over-unity, there seems to be a sweet-spot of input power and flux density of the permanent magnet for a given core material.
Has anyone successfully used a typical iron core transformer for these type of devices?


Quote from: kingrs
Also, a rod will never work as there is no return path for the field, a toroid is the best shape for a return path.
Your right there's not much other than air (perm. ~= 1). The hypothesis shows that you want to switch the core as quickly as possible, but that requires more energy. Somewhere there's a happy medium. My simulations of toroids last year (not FEMM) showed how toroids get their high effective permeability. Unfortunately the extra effective permeability comes at the cost of time. But I was probably overdoing it since toroids can achieve high frequencies. A short rod can indeed achieve even higher frequencies, but it's probably an over kill.

I think you guys are correct in that higher perm (to within reason) is better since it requires less energy to magnetize the material.

Paul

Offline PaulLowrance

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2483
    • Global Free Energy
Hi,

Is FEMM 4.01 the latest version? Every once in a while I get into problems where it takes forever during analysis and I know this is a program bug.  For example, it works fine for hours and all sudden I make a change and it can't analyze. It just sits there forever. Then I'll cancel it and click the undo button to put it back where it was and if I analyze again it still can't finish. So I'll restart the program and same thing, it freezes.

What I have to do is click New and complete recreate the exact same thing from scratch, except it analyzes without freezing. If there's a new FEMM version could someone post the download link?

Thanks,
Paul Lowrance

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Sponsored links:




Offline MeggerMan

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 500
Femm seems to lock up if you put two materials too close together, arcs next to arcs seem to cause me no end of issues.
Check the matrix is not creating too many triangles in a small space.
I think there are some issues with two surfaces very close to each other and it gives some very odd results for the torque.  If you looks at my latest simulation the torque change from 0.5 to 5 n/M

Regards

Rob

Offline PaulLowrance

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2483
    • Global Free Energy
It tried spacing objects and made sure there we not very many nodes (few hundred), but haven't tried using the arcs. You mentioned torque in FEMM. Is that something I could change that might help?

Thanks,
Paul Lowrance

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Sponsored links:




Offline Jdo300

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 683
    • The Magnetic 90 degree rule Theory
Hi Paul,

I use FEMME all the time to do permanent magnet motor simulations and coils setups. If you post a copy of the .fem file, I'll be glad to take a look at it to see why you are having problems.

God Bless,
Jason O

Offline GM

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 84
Hello everybody,

now I have done the measurements on my circuit and worked out the results.

I made two measurements because I used two kinds of coils.
Reason: In contrast to my previous mention the three layered coil around
the torodial core *does* show an effect, but in another way.

Where the 1-layered coil shows increasing kickback power and simultaneous
decreasing overall power consumption, the 3-layered coil shows nearly no
increase of kickback power but much more of decreasing of the overall power
consumption!

The first picture shows the measurements with the 3-layered coil.

All voltages where measures with the scopes RMS(eff) function which
read the RMS effectiv voltage for one signalperiode.

The voltages shown on the scopes screenshot have to be multiplied by
factor 10, because of the :10 dividide-factor of the scopes probes.


Picture 1, three-layered coil:
             Input power     Output power
w/o magnet   4.16 W          0.65 W
w magnet     1.52 W          0.64 W



The second picture shows the measurements with the 1-layered coil.

Picture 2, one-layered coil:
             Input power     Output power
w/o magnet   5.7024 W        0.41648 W
w magnet     3.016 W         0.79968 W



Worse luck! If the method of measurement and calculation is the right way,
then we have no over unity here (as I expected).
The values are showing a bad efficiency. :-/

Hmmm, subjectively I would say, the effect was more conspicuous with a
connected light bulb at the secondary coil using @ 15.8 KHz (as shown in my
previous experiements). This is a bit wired. I have to test more frequencies,
duty cycles and configurations.

In the animation you'll see a high scaled shot from the kickback-spike of
measurement-arrangement no. 2 (1-layered coil).
In the first frame you see current and voltage across the light bulb without
the magnet. In frame 2 with the magnet inside the core and in frame 3 I turned
the magnet by 180 degrees (which caused I higher overall power consumption
of the whole circuit than without magnet!)


What shall I say as conclusion? I think this arrangement doesn't have the potential
to be a over-unity device.

Regards, Markus

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy


Offline Jdo300

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 683
    • The Magnetic 90 degree rule Theory
Hello GM and all,

Here is an idea for you. Take the power from the back emf spikes and store it into a capacitor. Use the capacitor to feed a resonant tank circuit and use the output from the tank circuit to pulse feed power back into the primary side of the coil on your transformer. Assuming that you can capture the back emf spikes for 'free' without loading the source circuit. Just my two cents :-). I will still try out this circuit to see what kind of results I get.

God Bless,
Jason O

Offline PaulLowrance

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2483
    • Global Free Energy
Re: Interesting experiment with an transformer, 2 lamps, diodes and an magnet
« Reply #70 on: September 01, 2006, 12:04:10 AM »
Hi Jdo300,

Thanks for the reply. The forum does not allow .FEM files so I renamed it to EM2.txt  You can rename it to EM2.FEM

It seems that if I use the "snap to grid" then the problem goes away, so far. Knock on wood!

The attached file freezes with my FEMM 4.01, but if you realign all points to the grid then it seems to work. Do you think it's just my version of FEMM?

Thanks,
Paul

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Interesting experiment with an transformer, 2 lamps, diodes and an magnet
« Reply #70 on: September 01, 2006, 12:04:10 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline PaulLowrance

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2483
    • Global Free Energy
Re: Interesting experiment with an transformer, 2 lamps, diodes and an magnet
« Reply #71 on: September 01, 2006, 12:18:06 AM »
I spoke too soon. All the dots are snapped to the grid, but it still freezes. See the attached file EM2b.txt

Paul

Offline MeggerMan

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 500
Re: Interesting experiment with an transformer, 2 lamps, diodes and an magnet
« Reply #72 on: September 01, 2006, 12:56:12 AM »
Hi Markus,
I wish I had your scope, well done on the results.

So your best results so far is 42% output from 100% input.
But if you can get your circuit up to say 85 to 90% output and then introduce the magnet, then I think you may be on to a winner.

I am sorry I have no results yet, hope to do some testing Friday afternoon (finish early on a Friday).
First test will be to get to 85% using a step-up DC-DC converter and toroid then move on from there.

Just tested my dc-dc circuit at 154mA and managed 82.4% but there is very little change with the PM added.

Regards

Rob

Offline z_p_e

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 662
Re: Interesting experiment with an transformer, 2 lamps, diodes and an magnet
« Reply #73 on: September 01, 2006, 01:47:03 AM »
Markus,

I have done extensive work on the design of coil pulse drive circuits for pulse motors, and have found that the cemf spike you are capturing and trying to make greater than your initial input power is only good for about a 64% return. However, you have to remember that you are also doing work with the original coil pulse, and the cemf spike is essentially free.

If you monitor the input coil current, replace the cemf bulb with a short, then monitor the cemf pulse current, you will see that the two peak currents are almost identical, however, the pulse duration of the cemf pulse will only be about 64% the length of your input pulse. This of course assumes that your input coil current has not "plateaued" and is still rising before you turn off the current.

I would suggest you try this (shorting out the load) and confirm the 64%, then apply your magnet and see if you can stretch the pulse out again to exceed the 64%. You should also see that the peak currents are equal in amplitude.

Why not do some work with the input pulse such as driving a pulse motor? Then capture the cemf spikes to step-charge a capacitor to ~40V (assuming a 12V battery), then discharge it into a second battery and repeat. Bedini claims this will re-charge a spent battery before the first battery dies, which implies you can continuously rotate the batteries and run your pulse motor for as long as you want.

z_p_e

Offline PaulLowrance

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2483
    • Global Free Energy
Re: Interesting experiment with an transformer, 2 lamps, diodes and an magnet
« Reply #74 on: September 01, 2006, 05:47:07 PM »
Hi Paul,

I use FEMME all the time to do permanent magnet motor simulations and coils setups. If you post a copy of the .fem file, I'll be glad to take a look at it to see why you are having problems.

God Bless,
Jason O
Hi Jason,

I'm just wondering if you had a chance to try my FEMM files that I posted yesterday?

Paul

 

OneLink