Electricity, Magnetism, Gravity & Singularity by Al Francoeur

[Aaron]

ATTN: At the request of Al Francoeur, a portion of the proceeds and all royalties for this presentation will be donated to the local Salvation Army or Union Gospel Mission of Spokane, Washington to feed and shelter the homeless.

There are many examples throughout nature where mirrored symmetry appears at the micro level up to the size of galaxies. The division line is very similar to the neutral line or Bloch Wall of a magnet.

This is the premise of much of the model that Al Francoeur has been working on in relation to explaining how he believes the Ed Gray power supply works.
The Gray Motor was verified in the past to operate at over 300 COP, which means 300 times more work was demonstrated compared to the net loss in the batteries that were powering the motor.

Al happens to own the largest collection of the remnants of Ed Gray’s technology and he has been diligently working to reverse engineer the power supply to see what if any components or how it is built is operating in some unusual way.

There appears to possibly be a transformer winding method that on the surface would appear to not work and it deals with counter-turned windings that oppose each other. Conventionally, the thought would be that it would cancel out the ability to generate a magnetic field, but there are other instances where this kind of winding method has been implemented and it actually gives very unusual performance such as is seen in the famous Kromrey Generator.

Al’s reverse engineering efforts are a work in progress but for the first time ever, he presents his findings of the power supply to a public audience. Although it is not a conclusive report, it is an exclusive release.

He also goes into other aspects of his research including this design for a fuel vaporizer and his interference generators. I have personally been emailed by those claiming that his interference generators do not work, but I visited Al’s shop with Paul Babcock and we saw the generators working with the ability to light a lot of incandescent bulbs. Anyone stating that Al’s interference generators don’t work is spreading misinformation.

If you’re a fan of Ed Gray’s technology, then this presentation is a must have. And if your not, you should be! It was one of the most profound demonstrations of Free Energy in history and we’ve never been this close to understanding the operating methodology.

Learn more here: Electricity, Magnetism, Gravity & Singularity by Al Francoeur

[Netica]

Questions about Al's presentation regarding transformer

Hi Aaron,

Thanks to Al, Aaron and all invloved for making this video and information available.
It is great to have this new insight into this EV gray power supply transformer.

I am confussed about some aspects of the transformer and need some clarification.


Questions about E V Gray transformer in the power supply.

1/ Primary winding, just to understand.
The two primary wraps of copper look as if they are wound in same direction from pictures of the actual winding 38.50 on video and page 110 and 111 on presentation slides. Yet the diagrams he shows are shown to be in the opposite direction 40.04 in the video and page 114 on the slides. Are the diagrams on the slide done in a way of view from top and view from bottom? So really both the windings are effectively still going in the same direction and orientation.
So looking only from the top both windings would start and be wound in the same clockwise direction.


2/a. It is hard to understand how the secondary coil is wound going by the diagram on video at 42:31 and on the slides at page 125 and 126 The part I don't understand is that between every second layer of windings instead of just a continious connection there are leads that go outside of the coils to respective sides and back in again. Its broken up into 3 seperate double layers connected together outside of the coil. I just don't see or understand why this outside lead is done this way and what purpose it is for?

2/b. Also the best I can make out as far as windings go on the secondary is that one channel is wound in one direction and the other is wound in the opposite direction so all 3 double layers are wound in the same direction on each channel. Do you know if this is correct?

2/c. Can Al give the direction of the secondary winding of the inner channel and the outer channel with reference to the primary winding direction.

3/ Not having insulation between the windings of the primary seems unusual as they would mingle and just act as one winding I would think, Do you or anyone know why it was done this way?

4/ What kind of insulation is being used between all the windings and between primary and secondarys.

5/ The circuit diagram has a mistake in it as far as I can see. Where he shows the negative side of the primary there is a diode. He has drawn it in what I consider the correct orientation on Pages 112,113,114,115. showing the primary. But on the circuit diagram, pages 143 and 145 The diodes are the incorrect way around. The other diodes there arn't correct either and there's no way for the primary to conduct when the transistors switch on. Also the collapsing field needs to go back to the capacitors but the two D1 diodes won't let it occur as they are the wrong way around aswell.

6/ Looking at the bridge rectifiers on the drawings on page 125 and 126 the output for the secondary, all the diode symbols are shown the wrong way around, or the + and - are the wrong way around.


Is it possible to get Al to re-explain and clarify the things that I have brought up.
Maybe you could pass these questions onto him and get the answers and post them or maybe he could answer them in this forum.

Thank you,
And thanks for help.

[serendipitor]

More comments on Al's diagram

I am in the midst of drawing a simplified schematic more clearly showing the circuitry, and I will post it when it is ready. There are a few errors in the diode polarity and such in the presentation, but for an engineer it is easy enough to discern the actual function of the circuits without needing to go into complete detail. This version of the Gray technology is the 1979 power supply, and is apparently different from the previous versions, which used vibrators or spark gaps. COP for this version is unknown. It is my opinion at this point, subject to more information, that the power supply is really just that, a DC to DC converter that is making HV from the battery voltage at a power level of some hundreds of watts. Other than the odd primary coils, and the paired secondary windings of the transformer, there does not seem to be anything unusual going on. The conventional solid state circuit is complex mainly due to the type of devices available at the time (i.e. low beta), and it could be made more simply with present FETs, etc. Also, it is said that Hackenberger may have made intentionally misleading changes to the supply to obfuscate its actual function.
(More to follow).

[serendipitor]

More comments on Al's diagram

(Continued)

1. The SG3526 PWM generates two phase pulses of varying width, which through several stages of level shift and current boost will alternately switch on and off the main power transistors at the transformer primaries. This will give an AC waveform at the secondaries that is rectified by the full wave bridges and summed together for the final output. According to the Gray patent, this is used to charge capacitors in a stepped voltage waveform which are then discharged through inductors. It is not clear where the "cold electricity" aspect enters the picture. I think the secondary windings may be critical to this, and would be arranged so as to deliver sharp sliver pulses to the rectifiers, as is called for in Tesla's methods. It is not clear if Al's example has this function or not.

2. The SG1627, in conjunction with the small red encapsulated transformer, is simply generating a secondary supply of +5VDC and -5VDC. Those voltages are used for the driver bias on the level shifter stages, and the +5VDC supplies VCC to the SG3526.

3. The final stage of the driver path, labeled Ch1 and Ch2, are standard totem pole configuration, the PNP devices on the top, and NPN on the bottom. The emitters of the bottom pair are tied to the -5VDC supply, so as to permit more rapid and complete cut off the main switching transistors. This would also be a noise consideration perhaps, given the level of transients going around the device.

4. The winding labeled as "transistor trigger coils" is not that, but is actually the voltage sense and feedback winding. Its output is full wave rectified, filtered and applied through the pot to the Error input of the PWM controller, allowing regulation of the final HV.

5. There are some snubber RC's here and there which indicate that there was some effort required to control the voltage spikes from getting too high, as was normal practice for that time.

6. The primary windings of the main transformer are identical, but are energized with opposite polarity and alternating phase (i.e. one winding at a time) and thus produce AC pulses in the secondary. That the four layers of copper ribbons are touching looks not to be significant. They are all shorted at the ends, so insulating the layers would not likely have any effect. To investigate if the configuration of the windings is indeed an example of the theory that is described in the presentation, I am in the midst of creating a smaller version without all the regulation circuitry, and see if any anomaly is apparent.

Given that this power supply was used to charge capacitors, it's function could be duplicated in a variety of ways, as was shown in Mark Mckay's presentation. Certainly the engineer (probably Hackenberger) that designed the circuit knew what he was doing with conventional switching. The key point to focus on would be the main transformer, as far as I can see. The question is how does this create the "cold electricity" that is key to the technology? Tesla's technology was completely concerned with pulsed DC and its effects, so this power supply technique derives from that method.

[Netica]

Hello serendipitor,

Thank you for your posts, I didn't think anyone was bothering with this as I had no reply for so long.
I'm not to good with electronic circuitry so its really good to have someone like yourself to go over things. I can pick up on some things but no where near so comprehensive as yourself.

I am sure that both D1 diodes are the wrong way around and that this operates only on the collapsing field of the primary to transform to the secondary. And I also think that the wiring and other diodes in that area of the drawing are also incorrect.

I was wondering what you think the feedback winding actually regulates?

Also wondering if you think that the R1 resistors after the transistors could be replaced by a single one, is there any reason there needs to be one on each output of transistor?

[serendipitor]

Hello serendipitor,

I am sure that both D1 diodes are the wrong way around and that this operates only on the collapsing field of the primary to transform to the secondary. And I also think that the wiring and other diodes in that area of the drawing are also incorrect.

Yes, it looks that way to me.

I was wondering what you think the feedback winding actually regulates?

It will vary the pulse width of the drive signal. Wider pulse, higher voltage output.

Also wondering if you think that the R1 resistors after the transistors could be replaced by a single one, is there any reason there needs to be one on each output of transistor?

Those very low value R's are needed to balance the currents in the paralleled transistors. This is due to the fact that bipolar devices don't share current properly, and one device will hog all the current as it heats up, creating a run away condition. The resistors limit this effect. MOSFET's don't have this problem.

Another comment: The point at which Al labels the V+ feed point for T1, "split the positive", is not an example of what Bedini and followers have used this term to indicate. In the Gray power supply, this is just a convenient place to add fuses in this high current path. In Bedini technology, this refers to pulsing current between the positive pole of batteries of differing potential. While the EMA motor uses pulse current to and from lead acid batteries in the same vein as Bedini, it does not occur at the point in the power supply circuit so indicated.

[Netica]

I thought those R1 resistors was there because of the effective short circuit switching, The primary is just a short piece of copper and I thought that the transistors or even MOSFET's as you mention would heat up so quickly and blow.
What do you think about the load on the transistors/MOSFET'S under these pretty much short circuit conditions?

[serendipitor]

What do you think about the load on the transistors/MOSFET'S under these pretty much short circuit conditions?

That depends on the switching frequency and the permeability of the core material. I would guess that they were using something in the range of 50kHz-100kHz. If the core has high permeability, that allows even a few turns of coil plenty of inductance. The circuit probably does have some large peak currents in the primary, possibly 50A, but just for a very brief periods, say 100uS or so.

This kind of circuitry is common now in DC to AC inverters, where a low voltage like 12VDC at 100A (or more) is switch converted to 180VDC, then PWM to 120VAC.

Another comment: In the Mark McKay presentation on this same circuit, he commented that the central cylinder of the transformer core had been machined out and replaced with an iron core. The present image from Al's talk does not show this at all, and could be another one of these murky areas where deliberate changes were made by Hackenberger (or someone) to hide or obfuscate actual functioning circuitry. I would say that at the switching frequency implied by the windings, there would be extreme heating induced in an iron core, and such would not be workable.