Language: 
To browser these website, it's necessary to store cookies on your computer.
The cookies contain no personal information, they are required for program control.
  the storage of cookies while browsing this website, on Login and Register.

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

Tesla Paper

Free Energy Book

Get paid

Donations

Please Donate for the Forum.
Many thanks.
Regards, Stefan.(Admin)

A-Ads

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 Members: 84086
  • *Latest: Harper77

  • *Total Posts: 895475
  • *Total Topics: 15752
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 0
  • *Guests: 14
  • *Total: 14

Author Topic: E-Orbo replications  (Read 17713 times)

Offline Omega_0

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 437
Re: E-Orbo replications
« Reply #15 on: June 22, 2010, 08:57:56 PM »
Added second coil.
Rotor is going at 330 RPM on roughly the same peak current. Setup was not optimized for duty cycle or reed position too accurately, as this is just a quick measurement to see if everything is going ok.
Note that the net power is showing bigger hills, which means cemf is kicking in.
(First plot is voltage across two coils, in red, and current, in blue)

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: E-Orbo replications
« Reply #15 on: June 22, 2010, 08:57:56 PM »

Offline Omega_0

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 437
Re: E-Orbo replications
« Reply #16 on: June 27, 2010, 11:47:19 PM »
Effect of adding a diode to short the path of self induction:
The net energy input lowers.

I'm facing problems in measuring the actual current in the diode path. No negative current is flowing in that path after the pulse ends, but the negative voltage is snipped off by the diode, this is strange........Hopefully the circuit is correct.
« Last Edit: June 28, 2010, 07:32:42 AM by Omega_0 »

Offline Omega_0

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 437
Re: E-Orbo replications
« Reply #17 on: June 28, 2010, 12:08:51 AM »
More about material T38.
I'm attaching here the specs of toroids that I'm using in current version and also of the alloy T38 (which I guess is MnZn Ferrite). Its EPCOS part no. B64290L618X38, dimensions : 25.3X14.8X10 coated with blue epoxy.

Its Mu_i is 10000 and H(sat) is around 100 A/m from the datasheet. So from
H = N*I/lc
where N is number of turns, I is current and lc is flux path length, we can get the saturation current for say, 100 turns of coil:

100 = 100*Isat/lc
lc = pi*( 25.3+14.8 )/2 = 63 mm = 0.063 m
Isat = 100*0.063/100 = 63 mA

Or say you want Isat = 1 Amp, which gives N = 6.3 or 7 turns. So you would expect that just 7 turns at 1 Amp or 100 turns at 63 mA shall saturate the core completely and the rotor will not be attracted to the core at all. Sounds like free lunch.....

But, don't be surprised if the core refuses to follow the text book in presence of a strong neo. In my case the coil is taking max 2.8 Amps@100 turns and the core still shows strong attraction for the magnets ! I have no idea why this is.......... anyone knows ???? Isn't the core supposed to "disappear" for magnets when saturated ?

Either the formula I'm using is wrong or something else is happening here. This is an unknown land for me.

Did some more research on this. It turns out that the above calculation will not apply in presence of an external field. The correct equation is:

B = mu(H+M)
or H = B/mu - M
where M is the Magnetization of the core (which behaves as a magnet in presence of a strong neo magnet)

The Hsat taken from BH-curve is meaningless here as it is measured at M=0 (i.e. for non-magnetized core). So my updated view is that the current required to make the core invisible would be sum of currents required to demagnetize the core and re-magnetize it in the direction of current. I'm guessing that this can be huge.
« Last Edit: June 28, 2010, 07:30:58 AM by Omega_0 »

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: E-Orbo replications
« Reply #17 on: June 28, 2010, 12:08:51 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Omega_0

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 437
Re: E-Orbo replications
« Reply #18 on: June 30, 2010, 12:19:31 AM »
Added a pickup coil. It was shorted through a 1 ohm sense resistor. This slows down the rotor. The result is not OU obviously. The setup is not perfect either. But getting close. At this stage a measurement error of 0.004 ohm in input resistance make it OU from an UU. So the next step is to measure Rin reliably.

The efficiency varies but tends to settle down with time. I don't know how to interpret this result. It seems the system is OU for some times.

Offline Omega_0

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 437
Re: E-Orbo replications
« Reply #19 on: July 01, 2010, 07:10:16 PM »
Rather interesting results here.
These readings were taken at low RPMs (around 75 to 150 or so). And by placing a flat pickup coil of ~500 turns very near to the magnets (which lowers the RPM even more).

One would expect the net efficiency to decrease at low RPM, because the power induced in pickup coil decreases. But the interesting thing is, the power wasted in inductive rise and fall in input side decreases and the cemf is nearly 0. So after deducting the heat losses from the Ein, the net energy transferred is very very tiny.

I guess I have totally replicated the Steorn's Eorbo demo now. Learned many things during this built and my sincere thanks goes to steorn team.

There are still many things to resolve, and as I'm using a crude setup and not so accurate instruments, I can't place my 100% confidence on these results at this time.
.
« Last Edit: July 01, 2010, 08:21:21 PM by Omega_0 »

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: E-Orbo replications
« Reply #19 on: July 01, 2010, 07:10:16 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Omega_0

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 437
Re: E-Orbo replications
« Reply #20 on: July 01, 2010, 07:17:40 PM »
Some shots from the demo for comparison.

Offline Omega_0

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 437
Re: E-Orbo replications
« Reply #21 on: July 01, 2010, 07:27:48 PM »
Data for the third plot above is here....
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=downloads;sa=view;down=397

This one is most interesting, the input curve shows no slope at all, which means no energy is being transferred to the rotor.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: E-Orbo replications
« Reply #21 on: July 01, 2010, 07:27:48 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Omega_0

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 437
Re: E-Orbo replications
« Reply #22 on: July 01, 2010, 07:55:22 PM »
Now the main issue I'm facing, which can spoil all these pretty curves and render them meaningless. Below are some variations of the plots obtained by varying the value of Rin (=the resistance of the 4 coils + sense resistor) by a tiny bit each time. (Note that the actual value remains what it is, it was changed only in Excel intentionally to see the effect it has)

Assuming Rin=1.465 ohms, Ein gains an upper hand and we have CoE as usual.
Increasing the Rin just by 0.01 ohm, makes both slopes equal. Increasing it a bit further make Ein negative (a gain, instead of a loss, which could be very interesting if true). So the results are above the noise floor but measurement needs strict tolerances.

An error of +/- 0.01 ohm can make results invalid. If you see the steorn's plot, it is a lot neater and would need even higher error margin. One wonders how they measured Rin, and whether any error in Rin measurement was responsible for their claim of OU and they don't know this.

More experiments are needed.

Offline gravityblock

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3278
    • Get Dish Now! Free Dish Network System from VMC Satellite
Re: E-Orbo replications
« Reply #23 on: July 02, 2010, 10:39:28 PM »
Now the main issue I'm facing, which can spoil all these pretty curves and render them meaningless. Below are some variations of the plots obtained by varying the value of Rin (=the resistance of the 4 coils + sense resistor) by a tiny bit each time. (Note that the actual value remains what it is, it was changed only in Excel intentionally to see the effect it has)

Assuming Rin=1.465 ohms, Ein gains an upper hand and we have CoE as usual.
Increasing the Rin just by 0.01 ohm, makes both slopes equal. Increasing it a bit further make Ein negative (a gain, instead of a loss, which could be very interesting if true). So the results are above the noise floor but measurement needs strict tolerances.

An error of +/- 0.01 ohm can make results invalid. If you see the steorn's plot, it is a lot neater and would need even higher error margin. One wonders how they measured Rin, and whether any error in Rin measurement was responsible for their claim of OU and they don't know this.

More experiments are needed.

Excellent work!  If you could measure the instantaneous value of the resistor during the experiment, with an additional channel, then we would know if the OU is real or not.  This would allow us to use the instantaneous resistance value instead of a fixed value for the resistor.  As we can see with your data, a very small change in the resistance can make the results invalid.  Do you have a 4 channel scope?

Thanks,


GB

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: E-Orbo replications
« Reply #23 on: July 02, 2010, 10:39:28 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline Omega_0

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 437
Re: E-Orbo replications
« Reply #24 on: July 02, 2010, 10:52:11 PM »
Excellent work!  If you could measure the instantaneous value of the resistor during the experiment, with an additional channel, then we would know if the OU is real or not.  This would allow us to use the instantaneous resistance value instead of a fixed value for the resistor.  As we can see with your data, a very small change in the resistance can make the results invalid.  Do you have a 4 channel scope?

Thanks,


GB

No I have a two channel USB scope with ordinary probes. But you must have noticed that I'm using scope already to measure the Rin. I'm using the steady state part of the pulse to get values of voltage divided by current and then average many hundreds of these values. This ensures that the Rin is measured at runtime and at operating temperatures.

Here only problem is that the current value again depends on the sense resistor which I must assume to be exactly 1 ohm. I'm anyway investing in a good milliohm meter which should resolve the accuracy issue.

Offline Omega_0

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 437
Re: E-Orbo replications
« Reply #25 on: July 02, 2010, 10:59:31 PM »
Data in text format (CSV) for anyone who is not an Excel2007 user.

http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=downloads;sa=view;down=398

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: E-Orbo replications
« Reply #25 on: July 02, 2010, 10:59:31 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline Omega_0

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 437
Re: E-Orbo replications
« Reply #26 on: July 10, 2010, 10:29:30 PM »
Below is another plot for a experiment I did today. The red line shows the net Ein with rotor a bit farther than in usual place and rotating at a slow speed.

The blue trace shows the net Ein when rotor is place far away (4 inches approx from the coils), so that it does not rotate and does not influence the coils but is still able to trigger the reed. It was spun up by hand in this case.

The important thing to learn here is that the slope of the trendlines of these traces in both cases is almost exactly the same. The slope represents the net power being consumed. This means that the coils are consuming same power with or without the rotor.

This also means that no power is being transferred to the rotor during normal operation and the rotor is spinning for free, just as steorn claimed.

Offline Omnibus

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5330
Re: E-Orbo replications
« Reply #27 on: July 10, 2010, 11:31:00 PM »
@Omega_0,

No need to repeat you're doing a great job. I'm trying to convince prestigious labs to try to reproduce these experiments but so far I'm only meeting with complete lack of willingness. They don't want to hear about it. So, I just wanted to let you know as what the status of this is as of now. I'll continue the effort and will keep you posted.

Wonder if you're following the other thread where I was hoping that somehow this discrepancy will show up theoretically. That would've been the only way to raise any interest at all. So far to no avail. In addition, I'm studying the possible sources of experimental error and it very well may be that the 8 bit scope I have is just of not enough sensitivity for such studies, despite the current probe I got. Even Steorn's equipment may not be of enough accuracy for this kind of claim. This is something that has been bothering me from the get go but that's the most I could afford. What do you think about that?

Offline Omega_0

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 437
Re: E-Orbo replications
« Reply #28 on: July 11, 2010, 10:00:38 AM »
Omnibus

Steorn has a bad reputation, and free energy/overunity has worse. So I suggest not to refer to these terms when trying to convince the established guys on the matter. This is at most "an accounting discrepancy in energy" at this stage, and should be called so.

No financial gains are there in such studies, so no one will waste their time on this. Only the curious types will touch this. I agree with you that the precision needed to measure the quantities here is extreme, and is beyond the capabilities of an average hobbyist, which includes me. There are so many issues of probe loading, accuracy, tolerances and what not, which cloud the results and you are left with nothing but uncertainty.

I do read the other thread and you are doing a great job. Your persistence is remarkable, this quality is most needed in OU research. As I posted there a few days ago, the results you are getting are below the noise floor. You can't be certain about them. If there is really an energy discrepancy in "steorn-like" systems, it will show up in a variety of circuits, but it will be below the range of classical instruments.

Either one must devise something which can operate above the noise floor and produces very solid measurements or one must lower the noise floor by controlling the environment and using non-intrusive methods. Only a big lab can do that.

Offline Omega_0

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 437
Re: E-Orbo replications
« Reply #29 on: August 18, 2010, 08:21:02 PM »
Update at last...
I've gotten hold of a 4-wire kelvin bridge micro-ohmmeter which can measure up to 4 decimal places and is calibrated using a standard resistance box at the factory and the calibration can be traced back to at least national level standards. Another news is that, now I'm a proud owner of Metglas cores, both MAGAMP and MAGNAPERM (its part no. 2510P4AS and 2510V4AF). A dozen of them :D

So first thing I did is to measure all the resistances involved. It turns out that my earlier estimates do not match well with new (more reliable values), as I doubted. Now plugging in these values makes OU disappear completely. So a new struggle starts now.

Earlier I was using the scope values to get the Rin (= resistance of sense resistor(Rs)+that of coils), assuming Rs = 1. So I always got IV-I^2R = 0 perfectly when a DC was passed into the coils and current and voltages were measured with the scope. Which may mean that the earlier plots are still valid, but there is no surety that system is OU in reality.

With actual Rs and Rin values measured from micro-ohm meter and pure DC applied, I get a residual net energy (Pout<Pin, See the attached plot-1), which means the readings must be compensated to get a 0 net energy (Pout=Pin, see plot-2)

These baseline measurements are very important. I must measure every resistance at actual operating temperature to get an accurate enough reading and then must also compensate the scope values to get an agreement between micro-ohmmeter and the scope.

After that I must apply these corrections to the pulses measured during an actual run of the device. Its really too difficult and delicate affair.

 

OneLink