Author Topic: Real OU-Effect to Share with everyone!!! (Read 199210 times)

nievesoliveras · « **Reply #270 on:** March 15, 2009, 07:49:38 PM »

@duff

It seems that I made a mistake with the polarity. I thought that the side of the battery with the 0 was the negative pole.

But if it is the positive it should be tested like this.

This was what I meant with the other two diodes on the wrong polarity.
One diode will charge the cap the other will charge the battery when the cap is discharded. Or that is the hope.

Jesus

xenomorphlabs · « **Reply #271 on:** March 16, 2009, 01:09:22 PM »

@Jesus:
What is the purpose of the two diodes actually?
You have mentioned Rectification? But aren`t we having DC in the circuit anyway (at least on cap discharge)?
I donÂ´t see the advantage of using the diodes in contrast to leaving them out, as they open the line in both directions all the time (in contrast to e.g. a TRIAC which is timed), so they canÂ´t control the current direction while cap charge or battery charge.
It would be nice if you could elaborate on their function to help understand the circuit how
you intend it to work, i am sure you have a good reason to use 2 anti-parallel diodes.
Thanks

nievesoliveras · « **Reply #272 on:** March 16, 2009, 06:19:01 PM »

Quote from: xenomorphlabs on March 16, 2009, 01:09:22 PM

@Jesus:
What is the purpose of the two diodes actually?
You have mentioned Rectification? But aren`t we having DC in the circuit anyway (at least on cap discharge)?
I donÂ´t see the advantage of using the diodes in contrast to leaving them out, as they open the line in both directions all the time (in contrast to e.g. a TRIAC which is timed), so they canÂ´t control the current direction while cap charge or battery charge.
It would be nice if you could elaborate on their function to help understand the circuit how
you intend it to work, i am sure you have a good reason to use 2 anti-parallel diodes.
Thanks

I apologize if the capacitor is not charged with ac voltage. I thought that the coil when pulsed was filling the capacitor with ac voltage. So I proposed the diodes in order to rectify the voltage so when the capacitor discharges on the timed rotor the voltage will charge the battery through the second diode.
The circuit was better when I made it on the negative side. There was one only diode to charge the cap and one only diode to recharge the battery. The direction of the diodes were thinking that they were workong on the positive side.

Again I apologize!!!

Jesus

poynt99 · « **Reply #273 on:** March 17, 2009, 03:17:30 AM »

The question:

Why does it appear that using SW1 AND SW2 together causes the capacitor end-voltage to be almost twice as high when using only SW2 alone and with the diode?

A most probable answer:

RESISTANCE.

Easy to overlook, and not so obvious is the fact that two alligator leads in parallel will have roughly half the resistance of one alone. Where is the electrical path that puts SW1 in parallel with SW2 you ask? Through the capacitor of course!

SW2 connects the coil across the battery directly, and SW1 does so through the capacitor. At the instant a capacitor experiences a change of potential across its terminals it acts as a short, minus a finite internal resistance. This effectively places two connections to complete the circuit for a short instant of time, doubling the initial current. In fact to get optimum results, SW1 should be contacted a fraction of a second before SW2 connects. This most likely explains why the results have not been consistent.

To prove this theory and to consistently obtain better results, use two alligator leads clipped together in parallel to form SW2 and use the diode as per my previous post with the diagram here:
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=6734.msg163425#msg163425

.99

duff · « **Reply #274 on:** March 17, 2009, 04:06:50 PM »

Quote from: poynt99 on March 17, 2009, 03:17:30 AM

The question:

Why does it appear that using SW1 AND SW2 together causes the capacitor end-voltage to be almost twice as high when using only SW2 alone and with the diode?

A most probable answer:

RESISTANCE.

Easy to overlook, and not so obvious is the fact that two alligator leads in parallel will have roughly half the resistance of one alone. Where is the electrical path that puts SW1 in parallel with SW2 you ask? Through the capacitor of course!

SW2 connects the coil across the battery directly, and SW1 does so through the capacitor. At the instant a capacitor experiences a change of potential across its terminals it acts as a short, minus a finite internal resistance. This effectively places two connections to complete the circuit for a short instant of time, doubling the initial current. In fact to get optimum results, SW1 should be contacted a fraction of a second before SW2 connects. This most likely explains why the results have not been consistent.

To prove this theory and to consistently obtain better results, use two alligator leads clipped together in parallel to form SW2 and use the diode as per my previous post with the diagram here:
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=6734.msg163425#msg163425

.99

I performed the test with two leads as SW2. This time I did a total of 60 strikes.

The first 30 I was striking the alligator clips against the copper plate. The average voltage was 105V with a max of 191V.

The next 30 I clipped the alligators to a #14 wire that had one end curled. I struck 1/2 the time with the blunt end and the other 1/2 with the curled end. The average voltage was 150.9 with a max of 319V (one time).

Even though I got one 319V the average is still lower than NRG average which was 204V.

It seems to me the way the strike occurs has significant influence. The #14 wire with the curled end worked best, having more surface area and possibly skidding as the strike was made.

===

I have the commutators functional now but the results are not as good as I had hoped.
I polished the commutator and brushes (AWG 9 with end curled & filed flat on contact area & suspended on independent supports) with 1600 grit emery cloth. Still there is much noise and I do NOT see the capacitor charging to 300+ volts. I've also noted that I did not make my discharge bar wide enough to fully discharge the cap.

-Duff

Reiyuki · « **Reply #275 on:** March 17, 2009, 04:13:58 PM »

A couple questions if you get the time NRG,

1 - Would 2 seperate coils in parallel have the same effect as a bifilar coil? IE: Is it the 2 separate circuit paths or the proximity between windings that is important?

2 - Do you think wirewound resistors would be adequate or are they likely to release magic smoke?

3 - Is there a tuning to this negative-energy inrush? I mean, would a 5h coil gather 5x as much energy vs. a 1h coil, or is there a 'sweet spot' based on the voltage levels and/or capacitor ratings?

I sympathize with all the working on-the-road, I'm out-of-state and don't have any equipment with me to replicate, so I'm trying to make sense of this as much as I can before I get back.

poynt99 · « **Reply #276 on:** March 18, 2009, 12:09:04 AM »

Thanks Duff for the test.

I'm all out of ideas here guys. This may be a difficult one to characterize, since the results are so inconsistent.

Good luck with it and let me know if I can help in any other way.

.99

newton2 · « **Reply #277 on:** March 21, 2009, 11:17:14 AM »

Hello Honoured Profiles and The Honoured Administrator and The Honoured Anonymous Readers of This The Honourable OU-Forum !
Might I kindly just briefly mention about :
##
the Honoured Profile PaulLowran so kindly importantly mentioned in Reply 240 of 09.th March 2009 about socalled High-Voltages-withstandable "Transistors"......YES.....Such Power Bipolars Transistors and PowerFets might cheaply be DE-parted from Elder discarded PC-Monitors/CTVs....!
Also might cheaply various "FlyBack-power-diodes" + High-VoltagesCapacitors/Electrolytical-Capacitors + variouselfInductances"...etc....be DE-parted from various discarded OC-Monitors/CTVs/
PowerSupplies-"Gears"...etc !
##
the Continued Story about socalled "Switched Inductors" => might thus kindly be mentioned various References (per google-search and per Technical Libraries search, etc) to various Electronics-Litteratures/ElectroTechnical Litteratures about "Switch-mode"-Methods , etc !
And might be kindly hinted about : the socalled H-Magnetical-Flux-Windings-Turns--Effective-Inner-Area of surden regular Inductors/Coils-Topologies => might such about H-Flux-"through" CLOSED-Coils-Turns be ALTERED somehow ...like i.e. by altering the socalled LenzÂ´s Theoreme (LenzÂ´s Law)......YES....POSSIBLE......for i.e. the Historical Honoured Herr LenzÂ´s Theoreme has in Dogmes-Physics been too "mis-used" OUT of Original TheoremeÂ´s Limits......(hardly never was such intended once-upon when the LenzÂ´s Theoreme was realized about/formulated....)......!!

WKR & have Yourselves a nice Day and Weekend ; and for Whom It relates : Happy Easter !
My kind Thanks about Your All hardlabored important Participations in & Contributions to The Honourable Course of OU !

SPP-48 · « **Reply #278 on:** July 26, 2009, 08:33:37 AM »

@anyone

I got onto this thread a few days ago and was following it with great interest with the intention of replicating. It seems to be a good simple project for experimentation. When I got to this page (28) I noticed that the last entry was 21 March - 4 months ago. have I missed something?

Cheers

S

Tito L. Oracion · « **Reply #279 on:** July 27, 2009, 10:46:35 AM »

hi everyone

i don't know why its so hard for someone to accept that discharging a capacitor in a coil is the real source for free energy, even tesla says that capacitor is the most wonderful instrument ever been discovered.

gyulasun · « **Reply #280 on:** July 27, 2009, 11:19:58 AM »

Quote from: Tito L. Oracion on July 27, 2009, 10:46:35 AM

hi everyone

i don't know why its so hard for someone to accept that discharging a capacitor in a coil is the real source for free energy, even tesla says that capacitor is the most wonderful instrument ever been discovered.

Dear Tito L. Oracion,

Tesla said it indeed but why?

Because he found that he could control the rate of discharge of the capacitor by the switching time, i.e. he used up the given amount of the stored energy in a shorter time than was needed to charge the same capacitor up. This way he got higher energy to use for his purposes than he could have got from a normal generator with which he had charged up the capacitor. BUT the 'price' he paid for this higher energy was that the capacitor discharged more quickly! i.e. the stored energy in the cap was used up more rapidly than the time needed for charging it up.
Of course this can be done, no problem with this, because it is up to you how quickly or slowly you are going to consume a certain amount of stored energy, either from a capacitor or from other energy storage device.

So there seems to be no free energy here unless you show it differently?

Thanks, Gyula

Tito L. Oracion · « **Reply #281 on:** July 28, 2009, 02:40:20 AM »

Quote from: gyulasun on July 27, 2009, 11:19:58 AM

Dear Tito L. Oracion,

Tesla said it indeed but why?

Because he found that he could control the rate of discharge of the capacitor by the switching time, i.e. he used up the given amount of the stored energy in a shorter time than was needed to charge the same capacitor up. This way he got higher energy to use for his purposes than he could have got from a normal generator with which he had charged up the capacitor. BUT the 'price' he paid for this higher energy was that the capacitor discharged more quickly! i.e. the stored energy in the cap was used up more rapidly than the time needed for charging it up.
Of course this can be done, no problem with this, because it is up to you how quickly or slowly you are going to consume a certain amount of stored energy, either from a capacitor or from other energy storage device.

So there seems to be no free energy here unless you show it differently?

Thanks, Gyula

Hi sir good day

Actually for me its not the rate of discharge that is important here, its the arrangement of capacitor discharging separate from the source to the coil, tom bearden showed it many times actually.and i got success on it!.

did you try discharging many caps sequentially on a coil? and charging them sequentially also?

take note:
NO BATTERY DISCHARGING!

I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU ARE DOING WHY YOU CAN'T GET IT.

gyulasun · « **Reply #282 on:** July 28, 2009, 02:12:28 PM »

Quote from: Tito L. Oracion on July 28, 2009, 02:40:20 AM

Hi sir good day

Actually for me its not the rate of discharge that is important here, its the arrangement of capacitor discharging separate from the source to the coil, tom bearden showed it many times actually.and i got success on it!.

did you try discharging many caps sequentially on a coil? and charging them sequentially also?

take note:
NO BATTERY DISCHARGING!

I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU ARE DOING WHY YOU CAN'T GET IT.

Hi Tito L. Oracion,

Thanks for the answer, and no, I have not tried discharging many caps sequentially on a coil yet, sounds interesting! And do you mean you always recharge the caps from the flyback pulse, also in sequence, once you started from the first cap charged up from a battery?

Unfortunately, it takes energy from the battery to charge a cap up for a start and all the switching (or discharging) sequence of the caps also consumes energy... This is what I found in case of energy transfer between two caps via a coil. Well, I do not rule out any clever solution that may bring a COP of around 1. Maybe you have found already a setup that works with a COP >1

in this case my hat off to you and congratulations indeed. Perhaps you could throw some ideas on that as some bones to me?

I found your thread on this same topic here:
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=6250.0 and unfortunately nobody answered your last question in the end of the thread:

"" is it efficient if we discharge a little the caps in a coil?
and is it possible if we do it in a sequence of multiple caps? ""

So now it seems you have answered your own question. When could you throw some bones?

Thanks, Gyula

Tito L. Oracion · « **Reply #283 on:** July 30, 2009, 05:14:47 AM »

Quote from: gyulasun on July 28, 2009, 02:12:28 PM

Hi Tito L. Oracion,

Thanks for the answer, and no, I have not tried discharging many caps sequentially on a coil yet, sounds interesting! And do you mean you always recharge the caps from the flyback pulse, also in sequence, once you started from the first cap charged up from a battery?

Unfortunately, it takes energy from the battery to charge a cap up for a start and all the switching (or discharging) sequence of the caps also consumes energy... This is what I found in case of energy transfer between two caps via a coil. Well, I do not rule out any clever solution that may bring a COP of around 1. Maybe you have found already a setup that works with a COP >1 in this case my hat off to you and congratulations indeed. Perhaps you could throw some ideas on that as some bones to me?

I found your thread on this same topic here:
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=6250.0 and unfortunately nobody answered your last question in the end of the thread:

"" is it efficient if we discharge a little the caps in a coil?
and is it possible if we do it in a sequence of multiple caps? ""

So now it seems you have answered your own question. When could you throw some bones?

Thanks, Gyula

Hi sir good day
try it in a high voltage dc then make a pulse with a small current, yes we use energy input but a little only compared to the output it produce!

let one arm of the coil be connected already to the cap when charging it so that it becomes more efficient when caps is discharge , all we need is very small movement of the electron to produce a large output!

P.S. Bigger magwire makes strong magnetic field isn't it?

Note:

BE CAREFULL

johnkhutchison · « **Reply #284 on:** August 10, 2009, 01:49:34 AM »

THANKS I ENJOY YOUR WORK CHEERS JOHN

News:

User Menu

Author Topic: Real OU-Effect to Share with everyone!!! (Read 199210 times)

nievesoliveras

Re: Real OU-Effect to Share with everyone!!!

xenomorphlabs

Re: Real OU-Effect to Share with everyone!!!

nievesoliveras

Re: Real OU-Effect to Share with everyone!!!

poynt99

Re: Real OU-Effect to Share with everyone!!!

duff

Re: Real OU-Effect to Share with everyone!!!

Reiyuki

Re: Real OU-Effect to Share with everyone!!!

poynt99

Re: Real OU-Effect to Share with everyone!!!

newton2

Re: Real OU-Effect to Share with everyone!!!

SPP-48

Re: Real OU-Effect to Share with everyone!!!

Tito L. Oracion

Re: Real OU-Effect to Share with everyone!!!

gyulasun

Re: Real OU-Effect to Share with everyone!!!

Tito L. Oracion

Re: Real OU-Effect to Share with everyone!!!

gyulasun

Re: Real OU-Effect to Share with everyone!!!

Tito L. Oracion

Re: Real OU-Effect to Share with everyone!!!

johnkhutchison

Re: Real OU-Effect to Share with everyone!!!