!! Bi-toroid Transformer 1000% OU !!

[level]

Dear Gentlemen,
As a professional with more than 15 years of experience in academia and industry, I have to say that all this story about Bi Toroidal Transformer and efficiency above 100% (even above 1000%!!!) is absolutely nonsense. All of us very well know that efficiency cannot be above 100%. That is the fact. All the tests and measurements done by third party (Dr. Fusina from Defense Research Lab) are also completely wrong. I asked Thane to send me one transformer to do test and measure real efficiency, but it seems, he does not like that idea.
What he made is just a transformer with very high leakage inductance, nothing else. That is reason why the power factor is almost zero. And, to measure the input power when the power factor is also zero is very difficult. Especially difficulty using primitive method and equipment he uses. The input power must be measured using completely different methodology. Then, you will see, the efficiency is not above 100%, not at all. If I have a chance to have transformer to test it, I will post the real efficiency data.

Hi pgrbovic. Welcome to the forum. I have done some testing with the bi-toroid transformer concept, and although my setup may have been a fair bit off from the ideal (Thane Heins didn't provide enough details in his patent application to determine what the ideal configuration might be), I did not see over 100% efficiency in my own tests.

You mentioned that there is a special measurement method required for measuring power when power factor is very low. Can you give a little bit of an overview of what that method is, and how it differs from say just measuring the phase angle between the current and voltage waveforms on an oscilloscope screen?

[Dave45]

Dear Gentlemen,
As a professional with more than 15 years of experience in academia and industry, I have to say that all this story about Bi Toroidal Transformer and efficiency above 100% (even above 1000%!!!) is absolutely nonsense. All of us very well know that efficiency cannot be above 100%. That is the fact. All the tests and measurements done by third party (Dr. Fusina from Defense Research Lab) are also completely wrong. I asked Thane to send me one transformer to do test and measure real efficiency, but it seems, he does not like that idea.
What he made is just a transformer with very high leakage inductance, nothing else. That is reason why the power factor is almost zero. And, to measure the input power when the power factor is also zero is very difficult. Especially difficulty using primitive method and equipment he uses. The input power must be measured using completely different methodology. Then, you will see, the efficiency is not above 100%, not at all. If I have a chance to have transformer to test it, I will post the real efficiency data.

Could someone send me one too.
gimme a break build your own.

[Berg]

Well said! Where's the 'like' button?

Thank you. Much appreciated, Ein~+ein.

The post by Sputins that is the source of my inspiration: http://www.energeticforum.com/renewa...tml#post225890

[lotec]

gabriel device

Ive been reading a bit about BTT lately, but I have wondered if anyone here has tried to replicate the Gabriel device with any luck? It is based on the same principle ie protecting the primary dipole against negative flux feedback but uses a different geometry. Sorry no link or explanation, but it is easily googled and they can explain it much better than i could ever.

[Ein~+ein]

How many atheists show up in church only to proclaim to the congregation that they are fools for believing in God?

Answer: None

Church is a place of communal worship. The atheist isn't interested in worshiping God because he doesn't believe in God.

However, if the atheist did show up at church and cause such a ruckus, he would most likely be summarily tossed out on his ear.

Now we are gathered here at this forum to discuss concepts and devices which relate to the concept of overunity.

That is the purpose of why we are gathered here at this forum.

Would you please try to respect that purpose?

Well said! Where's the 'like' button?

[Berg]

Dear Gentlemen,
As a professional with more than 15 years of experience in academia and industry, I have to say that all this story about Bi Toroidal Transformer and efficiency above 100% (even above 1000%!!!) is absolutely nonsense. All of us very well know that efficiency cannot be above 100%. That is the fact. All the tests and measurements done by third party (Dr. Fusina from Defense Research Lab) are also completely wrong. I asked Thane to send me one transformer to do test and measure real efficiency, but it seems, he does not like that idea.
What he made is just a transformer with very high leakage inductance, nothing else. That is reason why the power factor is almost zero. And, to measure the input power when the power factor is also zero is very difficult. Especially difficulty using primitive method and equipment he uses. The input power must be measured using completely different methodology. Then, you will see, the efficiency is not above 100%, not at all. If I have a chance to have transformer to test it, I will post the real efficiency data.

How many atheists show up in church only to proclaim to the congregation that they are fools for believing in God?

Answer: None

Church is a place of communal worship. The atheist isn't interested in worshiping God because he doesn't believe in God.

However, if the atheist did show up at church and cause such a ruckus, he would most likely be summarily tossed out on his ear.

Now we are gathered here at this forum to discuss concepts and devices which relate to the concept of overunity.

That is the purpose of why we are gathered here at this forum.

Would you please try to respect that purpose?

[Madeo]

Sounds like you're in the wrong forum, my friend. People here are all about the impossible even if the odds are against them.


Peace

[pgrbovic]

Dr. Grbovic

Dear Gentlemen,
As a professional with more than 15 years of experience in academia and industry, I have to say that all this story about Bi Toroidal Transformer and efficiency above 100% (even above 1000%!!!) is absolutely nonsense. All of us very well know that efficiency cannot be above 100%. That is the fact. All the tests and measurements done by third party (Dr. Fusina from Defense Research Lab) are also completely wrong. I asked Thane to send me one transformer to do test and measure real efficiency, but it seems, he does not like that idea.
What he made is just a transformer with very high leakage inductance, nothing else. That is reason why the power factor is almost zero. And, to measure the input power when the power factor is also zero is very difficult. Especially difficulty using primitive method and equipment he uses. The input power must be measured using completely different methodology. Then, you will see, the efficiency is not above 100%, not at all. If I have a chance to have transformer to test it, I will post the real efficiency data.

[Khwartz]

Thane calls it bi-toroid, and yet he is not using two toroids as he in my (current) opinion should.

The central part of the BiTT are the two secondaries with two cores each, one core with the flux from the primary and hopefully one core with the flux generated by the secondary as a result from its own emf created when there is a load on it.

The flux from the secondaries generated by the secondaries come together and oppose each other in the second core "outside" the primary, that seems like a waste to me.

Why not have two primaries and one secondary like this: use two true toroids, each with a primary winding all around it, possibly in different winding directions, stack them together one on top of the other, wind the secondary around both toroids all around. Then connect the primaries in parallel making sure that when one of the cores has its flux in one direction the other has its flux in the other direction.

Maybe if the cores and the primaries are exactly equal the secondary will sit on a fence not knowing how to "start", that might be fixed with some turns of the secondary on just one of the cores.

Now, once the secondary knows which of the primaries is the leader, the flux of that primary will induce a current in the secondary and the secondary will hopefully send its own flux into the other primary thus using its own flux helping the primaries.

This sounds too good to work, although it at least is made up of two toroids now and therefore rightly can be called a BiTT

I have to order yet another toroid and test this after I'm done with this other thread: http://www.energeticforum.com/renewa...former-ou.html

/Hob

Nice ideas! nilrehob. Just let us know when you are done with it

[Berg]

Thane C. Heins' Bi-Toroid Transformer

It looks like that link doesn't bring up the thread.

Anyways, Thane's discovery is truly amazing.

Nothing is too wonderful to be true. Michael Farady

See http://www.energeticforum.com/renewa...e-c-heins.html

[Mario]

Some of you are probably well aware of Thane's Perpiteia Generator, breaking Lenz's law to pieces but recently, Thane has produced a 1000+% efficient OU! Bi-Toroid transformer.

Bi-Toroid Transformer

If you follow from pages 77 onwards there is enough information to create a replication. Unfortunately I dont have the testing equipment to verify his claim. But maybe one of the more experienced members might be interested in replicating and giving the rest of us an ~Imhotep~ instructional type video

Hi guys, sorry but I can't seem to find the thread. Is the link wrong or has the whole thing already been taken off-line...?
EDIT: Nevermind, I just noticed this is old stuff...

[HarryCat]

What kind of coil wrapping wire?

Hello,
I've been looking over this Bi Toriod for a few days now and currently in the process of getting ready to build one. The only problem that I'm having is I can't figure out what kind of Coil Wrapping Wire I'm supposed to use.. I know it's 20 gauge wire with 2000 turns for the primary and 200 turns for the secondary's but what type of wire is it? Is it magnetic coil wrapping wire or just plain old insulated coil wrapping wire?
Thanks for any info.

[Khwartz]

Open letter to Thane

Hi everybody!

It's the second time I write to Thane without answer while I think my question is valid (I can very conceive he's much busy), so I make a copy of here as an "open letter" that you may comment

"Hi Thane and Very Well Done for all your major breakthrough.

I'm electrician myself, have my own business in France, work on the subject of free energy, especially on a device that look much to your Bi-Toroide but without core and not with the primary out inside, working by atomic resonating and Tesla principals.

I've seen many of your videos recently and something bother me:

You speak about "Watt" at the input, and you state: 0V*0.125=0W because of the power factor, but in many country the grid makes pay for V*A, what we call here, in France "puissance absorbée" ("absorbed power"), no Watt, means with reactive power["VAR" or "RAV"?], or like in France, we are not allowed to make installations with a power factor too much important (very small indeed) if not compensated by sets of capacitors. (A bit like with fluo-bulbs having no capacitor inside that cost near 50% energy than it says on it)

So, as I'm interested both by your own ideas and realizations to distribute ans install them in France, could you precise me the COP you get in your tow system, static and rotative, but with this formulas: POWER DELIVERED by the generator with a significant load / POWER ABSORBED at this input, with as formula for "apparent power":

(APPARENT POWER [Watts]^2 * REACTIVE POWER [VAR]^2)^(1/2)

Cause I remember you again: even if you say you measure "0V" at the input, when you read "0.125A" same time(like in your demo for the BiTT) you do pay to the grid, aren't me true? and any way, how could be "0V" if plugged and switched-on?!! :/

Cheers, Khwartz"

[Italics: Adds for the post]

[FRC]

Replication ?

Has anyone out there had any success with replicating the original ? If so,
were the results positive ?


FRC

[nilrehob]

Thane calls it bi-toroid, and yet he is not using two toroids as he in my (current) opinion should.

The central part of the BiTT are the two secondaries with two cores each, one core with the flux from the primary and hopefully one core with the flux generated by the secondary as a result from its own emf created when there is a load on it.

The flux from the secondaries generated by the secondaries come together and oppose each other in the second core "outside" the primary, that seems like a waste to me.

Why not have two primaries and one secondary like this: use two true toroids, each with a primary winding all around it, possibly in different winding directions, stack them together one on top of the other, wind the secondary around both toroids all around. Then connect the primaries in parallel making sure that when one of the cores has its flux in one direction the other has its flux in the other direction.

Maybe if the cores and the primaries are exactly equal the secondary will sit on a fence not knowing how to "start", that might be fixed with some turns of the secondary on just one of the cores.

Now, once the secondary knows which of the primaries is the leader, the flux of that primary will induce a current in the secondary and the secondary will hopefully send its own flux into the other primary thus using its own flux helping the primaries.

This sounds too good to work, although it at least is made up of two toroids now and therefore rightly can be called a BiTT

I have to order yet another toroid and test this after I'm done with this other thread: http://www.energeticforum.com/renewa...former-ou.html

/Hob