Gray Tube Replication

[nat1971a]

Thanks mark and aaron for the feedback.

It looks like i have broken all my thyratrons as i can no longer produce the effect.

I have ordered some more to continue testing

Regards,
Nat

[Aaron]

misc and cap 38

Hi Mark,

I have other 'possible' findings and some simplifications in my own methods.
If you want to get together sometime soon, email me anytime. Northside
would work best for me but I'm flexible.

I have some things I still have to get back to you too.

On cap 38, if it is filled up and a HV discharge goes from HV rod to grid,
that cap can discharge over the gap towards the rods to get to a common
ground - it causes the plasma discharge too. That diagram of mine you have
in your document is actually that method that I played with for a while.

[Spokane1]

A Date for Next week

Hi Mark,

I have other 'possible' findings and some simplifications in my own methods.
If you want to get together sometime soon, email me anytime. Northside
would work best for me but I'm flexible.

Dear Aaron,

I would love to get together with you, but right now I'm on vacation in southern California (have to make the wife happy).

I've found a local electronic surplus store and made some killer deals on copper strap, plastic fasteners, reslovers, shaft encoders, HV resistors, pulse transformers, and delrin sheet.

I shall get in touch as soon as I get back and we can review all your backward diode work and brain storm the next experimental step.

I'm pretty slow at times. I should have made the connection between your work and the Bedini effect months ago. Oh, well better late than never.

Mark

[nat1971a]

@arron

Please advise what type of thyratrons you have tested

thanks
N.

[Aaron]

thyratron

Nat,

Please refer to McGratten's part #'s, that was almost 10 years ago it
seems. There were like $125-150 a piece I think. Maybe cheaper now.

[Guest]

system build

Alright, with a couple of new capacitors I've assembled the Ed Gray circuit
as you've shown in readable form Aaron. The diagram would be a mirror image
of what is available on the PES Wiki minus the load coil, and there are added
resistors.

I've adjusted the spark gap connected to #2 capacitor to be wider
than the other, and have 40ohms of wirewound resistance to limit
the current from the battery.

The method I'm using to experiment with is tapping +12V by hand from
the battery onto the recieving end of those resistors. Initially a few
small size sparks could be seen in the gaps, then nothing further.

Besides what I've done already in this particular configuration, what else
is there that's missing besides the coil? Does it really make so much of
a difference that without it the system doesn't work?

[Spokane1]

Setup Question

Alright, with a couple of new capacitors I've assembled the Ed Gray circuit

Dear Geotron,

Pardon me for not being able to follow the detailed development of your apparatus. I was wondering what you hope to observe or measure in your experimental attempt at this time?

Mark McKay,PE

[Spokane1]

Reverse Discharge Effect

Hi Mark,

On cap 38, if it is filled up and a HV discharge goes from HV rod to grid,
that cap can discharge over the gap towards the rods to get to a common
ground - it causes the plasma discharge too. That diagram of mine you have
in your document is actually that method that I played with for a while.

Dear Aaron,

Yes, I've done that same experiment with similar equipment. The series "Capacitor #38" does slowly charge up then discharges back through the spark gap. In my observations the effective capacitor #38 can only charge to a certain level. In my setup it was about 3 KV (using an electrostatic meter) with the supply pulses being far above that from the output of an automotive ignition coil, which could have been a s high as 20 KV.

At the time it was a pain because it limited how high I could charge the capacitor, which was far less than I had hoped for. A series HV diode improved the situation but didn't seem to eliminate it.

It appears to me that charging a capacitor through a spark gap has very stick limits as to what you can do.

So, I know (or have an idea) as to what you are describing.

Mark McKay, PE

[Guest]

Dear Geotron,

Pardon me for not being able to follow the detailed development of your apparatus. I was wondering what you hope to observe or measure in your experimental attempt at this time?

Mark McKay,PE

The overunity effect - battery charging - is what I'm going for.

After reading Magratten's research it has become apparent that the
low-voltage side resistance is used to limit the current through the
spark gap and back to the (-) battery, for which reason I've added
wirewound resistors from the (+) pole.

My use of the mini spark gap fittings is in place of the cset; it
works in the same way, with the plasma discharge method as well.

Could it be that without having enclosed them to be airtight that
the gasses are not ionizing properly?

What I've shown in those pics is a true representation of the circuit
topology - two spark gaps, high-voltage cap, low-voltage cap, blocking
diodes, resistance, fullwave bridge; the 12v battery. I've only to
guess that having those spark gaps open as they are is the cause of
its malfunction.

What else besides that could it be?

[Spokane1]

Oh Gost! said he "What can IT Be?"

The overunity effect - battery charging - is what I'm going for.

What else besides that could it be?

Dear geotron,

The fact is none of us know what "IT" is. Nor do we know how to make it, measure it, store it, convert it, or increase its effectiveness. But I firmly believe that "IT" is there and can be manifested with rather simple tools and components - like the one you are working with.

Don't be hard on yourself if "IT" doesn't explode from some arc some time and smack you on the head. If "IT was easy to produce it would have been discovered a 1000 times over in the normal course of developmental and hobbyist electronics. Dr. Tesla made "IT" and documented the details in about 20 patents, yet no one that we know of has been able to figure out just how he did "IT". The components to make "IT" (so far) seem to be simple, put the actual process is another matter.

I wouldn't recommend putting your faith in the patents that E.V. Gray left behind. Yes, there are a few clues in those documents but that's all. Gray had no intention of ever disclosing "IT". He only spent the time and money on patent applications to placate his potential investors. All of Gray's patents are an exercise in frustration. None of them will yield a working OU device - not even close. (and several people with $$$ have tried)

To complicate matters, Gray didn't know what "IT" was either and only had a vague understanding of how to make "IT". Marvin Cole became afraid of the power of "IT" and left town to avoid becoming a security risk. Thus providing a job opportunity for a classical electrical engineer to figure out what "IT" was. (It took him about 4 years to figure it out with working equipment in front of him).

So, we all have a lot of ground to cover before we tell you "What IT could be".


Gary Magratten,

I've been working with Gary for the past few months to review the design of his second generation prototype engine the PEMM2. Mostly I have been working on the power supply. He plans on using microwave oven transformers and capacitors. I've been modeling his proposed design to see if it can keep up with the power demands he will be needing for the increased horsepower. He is working towards a 5 HP motor on this model.

Gary's present OU concept has to do "Electron Avalanche" which is a well know classical process that takes place in DC sparks. He claims that he has achieved current gains of up to 8.5X through his arc system. This added energy is used to pulse his four pole repulsion motor design. All the OU takes place in the arc. After the current gains have been made the rest of the design is straight classical engineering.

However he is employing a mechanically stretched arcs in the presence of an axial magnetic field. At least he is using 2 of the four parameters that I think are necessary. Maybe that is all he needs, which would be great.

He already has his patent application written up and ready to go. He also has contracted a company in China to build the initial models. I think his power supply needs to be tweaked a little to met the power demand even with the claimed current gains.

I don't know what documentation of his you are reading, but he has given up on the fixed gap CSET concept after exploring it for several years. He has his latest writings for sale on his web site ($35.00 for all three). He is now into dynamic arcs. Which is where I think the magic is also.

But, also consider we both could be very wrong.

We know so darn little about the nuts and bolts of the non-classical process employed by Gray/Cole/Hackenberger that we could easily spend the rest of our life times and not be granted one whiff of success. Yes, I've made a whole lot of speculations on this subject, but speculations are not engineering guidance or established fact - just dreams and schemes based upon considered observation.

Be prepared to face constant perceived failure. We know about as much about "IT" as Edison knew about how to make a light bulb. He thought it could be done, but it took about 250 prototypes to make the initial breakthrough. We know our circuit is going to be more complicated than that.

Back to your Setup:

So, you are going to be looking for anomalous battery charging properties. Man, that is a tough row to hoe. As you know John Bedini has been down that road for years. Yes, it appears (at least to him and others) that "IT" can be generated in his approach and that "IT" can be conducted along copper conductors to impact the plating process that takes place in a wet-cell lead acid battery. He has spent a lot of inventor's money, a lot of his time, and used a lot of good instrumentation to explore these effects. I am not an expert on John's leading edge research, but there are a few things I think I have picked up:

1. The cumulative effects of charging batteries with these anomalous particles is very slow and requires several cycles of charge and discharge.

2. The battery charging scheme is more complicated than a regular battery charging process. Apparently, the battery is charged to a level where the specific gravity of the electrolyte reaches a certain point, which is less than a standard full charge, and then discharged at a specific rate for a specific time. Each size and model of battery has a specific processing regime that took John a long time to establish. Each one of his non-classical chargers produced different results. Certain batteries will not work at all.

3. After these batteries had been properly conditioned then they would exhibit an OU property. But they had to be recharged with a non-classical charger every time. If a classical charger were used only once the delicate lead matrix would be destroyed.

4. Once the OU system had been established I've heard COP's of up to 3.5 being observed, BUT it was over several hours of charging and discharging to observe this phenomena. Thus, the effective power level was only a few 10 of watts. I have never heard of an actual figure, probably because of the difficulty of establishing a fixed value for this kind of system. For a solar cell system this would be a great boon, but it seems that it was a fragile situation requiring a lot of tender love and care.

If you are looking for OU in battery charging take a close look at John's Work and see if this appeals to you. The problem is, you may see OU in your data but it will be a hard sell in the real world.

MY OPINION:

The battery banks in the E.V. Gray technology serve more than one purpose. The actual energy that was used to operate the power supplies was easily replaced with the on board generator. The batteries were never intended to be completely recharged from the classical return pulse current.

The problem (again more of my speculations) was from the electrostatic harvest process that was used to recharge all the storage capacitors. This process (described in detail in Chapter 6 of my book) required the low voltage charge carriers to make the system work. After a while, it just sucked the battery dry and it wasn't from lack of charging. The free electrons were sucked out (to make anomalous particles) and not returned thus the lead matrix could no longer properly form thus leaving a pile of lead-sulfate sludge in the bottom of each cell. The batteries were used up much like an old carbon-zinc flashlight battery. I'm hoping that some more modern approaches might provide a solution to this challenge.

The point is the OU in the E.V. Gray technology didn't recharge the batteries - it destroyed them. Of course the higher the power level the quicker the destruction. Cole, Gray, and Hcakenberger all worked on this problem and to the best of my knowledge they didn't solve it, but some improvements were accomplished along the way - all undocumented of course.

Again back to your setup:

If you are looking for an electrical OU how do you plan to find it? The proposed anomalous particles produced huge magnetic fields - indistinguishable form classical magnetic fields except for their magnitude. How do you intend to measure a significant increase in a magnetic process over and above ambient conditions? You certainly won't see it in a digital voltage reading or an oscilloscope trace. You probably will not see it in an increase of heat since these particles are suppose to travel like superconductors and not generate heat.

This is a tough challenge for all of us to consider and deal with. I have one weak idea proposed in chapter 9 of my book. But it is more speculation at the moment. However a pretty sharp magnetic's expert came up with it. I call it the Gunderson detector.

Pardon me for taking up your evening. Being on vacation allows me the time to do unsolicited lectures since being a tourist doesn't do much for me. Once I get home i shall no longer ramble on like I have this last week, so don't expect me to compose long comments like this since I'll be busy doing experiments.

May "IT" be with you

Mark McKay, PE

[Spokane1]

Back to Nuts and Bolts

The overunity effect - battery charging - is what I'm going for.

After reading Magratten's research it has become apparent that the
low-voltage side resistance is used to limit the current through the
spark gap and back to the (-) battery, for which reason I've added
wirewound resistors from the (+) pole.

My use of the mini spark gap fittings is in place of the cset; it
works in the same way, with the plasma discharge method as well.

Could it be that without having enclosed them to be airtight that
the gasses are not ionizing properly?

What I've shown in those pics is a true representation of the circuit
topology - two spark gaps, high-voltage cap, low-voltage cap, blocking
diodes, resistance, fullwave bridge; the 12v battery. I've only to
guess that having those spark gaps open as they are is the cause of
its malfunction.

What else besides that could it be?

Dear geotron,

OK, lets get down to your present circuit and I shall offer my limited humble opinion on what your appear to be doing. I'll take this piece at a time. Again this is only my imperfect opinion on the matter.

"that the low-voltage side resistance is used to limit the current through the
spark gap and back to the (-) battery"

I agree with you on that conclusion, but there are other subtleties to consider as well. If you look at Gray's "Pulse Engine" patent check out the reference patents. The last one was done by a guy named Phinney. Down load this patent and study it. A lot of useful clues are to be found within. I propose that the whole purpose of the CSET was a switching system. Thus the resistor of which you speak did limit the current when the CSET fired.

"My use of the mini spark gap fittings is in place of the cset; it
works in the same way, with the plasma discharge method as well."

Well that will work for modeling the arc, but you no longer have the "grids" that acted as a low value HV capacitor (or so I think). They played an important part in the original device. If you have eliminated them - then you must explain to your readers (me) why you did so and how that is going to affect the proposed operation of your topology.

"Could it be that without having enclosed them to be airtight that
the gasses are not ionizing properly?"

I don't think that is going to be a major problem. I think the arc that was used to generate the OU particles was done in open air. In fact the air was constantly replenished by means of a blower with a pressure of about 1/2 psi.
Now the arc that was employed in the CSET to do HV switching might have been intended to be sealed. Again look at the Phinney patent and you can read about some commercial sealed arcs used as components. In the last CSET ever made Gray made provisions for an added atmosphere, but never did put anything in the enclosure. (according to Mark Gray)

"What I've shown in those pics is a true representation of the circuit
topology - two spark gaps, high-voltage cap, low-voltage cap, blocking
diodes, resistance, fullwave bridge; the 12v battery. I've only to
guess that having those spark gaps open as they are is the cause of
its malfunction."

OK, now I understand. You are building a very bare bones CSET circuit without the grids. You are using two small fixed arc chutes to replace the CSET gap and the gap in the commutator. You are using a full wave rectified Microwave oven transformer as a power supply. I assume you have a separate blocking diode in shunt with the main storage capacitor?

What a flash from the past. I recall doing the same kinds of experiments 10 years ago. After about a year I came to the conclusion the Gray and the patent office were full of crap. I couldn't find OU in any part of that circuit setup. But that doesn't mean there isn't any or that I was looking for it in the right place with the right instrumentation.

Be glad to send you photos, lab note book copies, scope traces and such so you can benefit from my experience. Drop me a line at mmckay@simplexgrinnell.com and let me know what you want to see. It might take a few days to dig it all out.

What are you using for your trigger switch? In that setup they were using the commutator. Are you going to let the Oven transformer build up a voltage on the capacitor and let the system self discharge? Certainly simple enough, but that transformer is pretty hefty it might have enough current to strike a continuous arc and melt your diode array. I would recommend having some kind of quick interrupter on the input side of your transformer to see what happens.

I hope you will find something more than I did. I may be angry and bitter about those early experiments but today my present conclusion is that the CSET never had anything to do with the OU process. Hackenberger thought they did but had to go back to the drawing board when they failed to produce. I think Gray pointed him in the wrong direction starting his first day on the job. The problem was Gray didn't know for sure what those tubes did that Cole left behind, but he was sure they were pure magic.

Nobody here or on any other forum is going to be able to offer you any usable advice on your replication circuit. You are exploring new territory, maybe you might get lucky?

Mark McKay, PE

PS: Despite the past failings of the CSET circuit Aaron has observed some interesting phenomena with the reversed diode that needs to be expanded upon. In this application the physics is much like the Bedini School Girl Motor blocking oscillator. The concept is to stress the PN diode junction just enough to go into secondary break-down and then only allow a limited current to flow. Between this limited current and the junction capacitance a relaxation oscillator is formed. The result is an RF burst across the junction. If this condition can be maintained then we will begin to look for evidence of the generation of anomalous particles. I certainly don't want to use lead-acid batteries as anomalous particle detectors - I don't have the patience for it. For now we don't even know in which direction the particles move from the point of creation - if that is what happens.

[Guest]

Well, thank you for clearing the air on this Mark. I may indeed rebuild
it again, this time with the grids and tube design in order to obtain the HV
capacitor effect, although I can't say I'm going to be in a rush to complete
it yet what with your apt portrayal.

Its the funniest thing... every once in a while I get something like the
following picture shows, tapping the 12V signal against the anode side of
those three blocking diodes by hand. It may be that the lower gap without
a spark is actually touching ends, for which reason there is no arc shown.

I wish you and Gary all the best in your endeavors, and hope that the
solutions will present themselves. It may be all too apparent already that
my area of expertise is not in electronics, and therefore I will concede
into a neutral standpoint on this technology for the time being. I'm glad
to have been participant in its replication, although must continue on my
search elsewhere for this elusive goal of Overunity.

[Guest]

The following video may help explain the image capture...

[ LV Blast ]

[nat1971a]

Guys,

I found the english version datasheet for my thyratron. Looks like i applied way to much voltage to the grid and heating the filament. I am learning about these bad boys as I go. So that explains why they died. So i will reiterate what the secret is. AC to the grid of the thyratron!! From what i understand so far this makes the thyratron behave like a valve. Its on then it is off and repeats on and off etc.

TG1-0,1/0,3
Name TG1-0,1/0,3
Application field in relaxation and rectification modes
Cathode type Oxide,indirect heating
Envelope Glass
Mass,g 40
Filament voltage,V 6,3
Filament current,A 0,54-0,66
Ignition voltage,V 25
A-C voltage,V 20
Grid voltage,V minus14-29
Max.average cathode current,A 0,1
Max.reverse voltage,kV 0,3

RUSSIAN TUBES - Tubes Info

[nat1971a]

I love brute force!! It got me results quick!!