Gray Tube Replication

[SuperCaviTationIstic]

Of course!
In fact Gray problems with replication originated from not counting the inductance of the copper rod. In reality that should be a tidy wound coil and ..you see ? Now there is a coil, a spark gap ,resistor and a big HV capacitor in transmitter section. Exactly like in Tesla method of conversion.
That tube was surely an attempt to enclose Tesla magnifying transmitter along with receiver in one nice vacuum tube.

Perhaps the coil you mention should be wound with alternating directions....bucking fields....inhibits current flow! RALPH BERGSTRESSER'S SPARK PROLONGING DEVICE (DJED PILLAR)

[pha3z]

Studying Aaron's Work

I've been studying Aaron's videos. I am little confused because some of his videos are temporary modifications for the sake of demonstration. I'm having trouble understanding what he considers to be a total setup that most closely resembles what he feels should be used as a working motor/tube combination.

Any guidance here?

On another note, has anyone here tinkered with solenoid engines or other geometries which focus the magnetic field to maximize work? If Aaron's Gray circuit were implemented in a more mechanically efficient motor, you should be able to get mega-torque.

[pha3z]

Hello,
Some time ago I have casually read that thread about Mr. Edwin Gray.. I have read some docs about that.. In fact Gray isn't an inventor have only read old patents and thinked about that.. The circuit of Gray in fact is an Energy Transmitter/Receiver at the same time and all start from Tesla work.. I have understand very well how Gray system work and there are some ways for create that.. Object of Gray was car motion but you can produce electricity directly and with an simple circuit modification..

Didn't Aaron say this is wholely innaccurate? Its not a simple transmitter receiver circuit and is not analogous to Tesla's work.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong. Maybe Aaron himself should comment?

[boguslaw]

Didn't Aaron say this is wholely innaccurate? Its not a simple transmitter receiver circuit and is not analogous to Tesla's work.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong. Maybe Aaron himself should comment?

IMHO it's always transmitter receiver thingy. What ever OU device you analyse.

[Aaron]

motor geometry

I've been studying Aaron's videos. I am little confused because some of his videos are temporary modifications for the sake of demonstration. I'm having trouble understanding what he considers to be a total setup that most closely resembles what he feels should be used as a working motor/tube combination.

Any guidance here?

On another note, has anyone here tinkered with solenoid engines or other geometries which focus the magnetic field to maximize work? If Aaron's Gray circuit were implemented in a more mechanically efficient motor, you should be able to get mega-torque.

I completely agree. I think it is much more efficient to get the mechanical
work out of a solenoid setup with a Scottish Yoke setup like a Bourke
Engine geometry. I posted a solenoid idea for that in Peter's Electric Motor
Secrets thread.

As far as a final setup, etc... I think it is all a matter of opinion as well
as it being a matter of opinion on what is really happening.

I do know this. x joules of "charge" in a cap discharged over a certain
period of time is supposed to lift a certain weight to a certain height over
a certain period of time. Utilizing this method that I have shown in
the diagrams I developed for these experiments, it appears to kick it a
little higher a little faster. I would love to see more experiments here to
see conclusively if these modified plasma jet ignition circuits that simply
have a real coil for motive purposes added (my innovation) is doing
more work than the math predicts is possible based on what we're starting
off from in the caps.

[Aaron]

what is Gray's technology

Didn't Aaron say this is wholely innaccurate? Its not a simple transmitter receiver circuit and is not analogous to Tesla's work.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong. Maybe Aaron himself should comment?

I think it will be forever debated what Gray's process is and nobody can
prove they are right even if they get results because there would be no
proof that it would be exactly what Gray or Cole was doing until some
proof surfaces (speculation doesn't count as proof - including mine).

[Spokane1]

Yet another short summary for the interested

I think it will be forever debated what Gray's process is and nobody can
prove they are right even if they get results because there would be no
proof that it would be exactly what Gray or Cole was doing until some
proof surfaces (speculation doesn't count as proof - including mine).

Aaron,

You are certainly spot on with that conclusion:

Here is another one of my short summary's on where my particular research is going based upon my interpertation of the information I have collected to date. Everybodies elses ideas are just a valid at this point.

Recent analysis of a number of sheets of text from a former E.V.Gray investor (the GD documents) has cast a whole new light on this technology.

The E.V. Gray motor (actually developed by Marvin Cole) is more like a Whimhurst Machine on steroids. There were two seperate modes of operation 1.) The classical magnetic repulsion mode 2.) The non-disclosed and non-classical electrostatic mode that added torque from classical dielectric repulsion but also offered a discovered source of induced charge that was harvested to recharge the main storage capacitors.

To get this to work required a copious amount of low voltage charge carriers from the lead acid batteries. Check on patents for Electrostatic motors and you will see why a low impedance battery is a required component in these kinds of cirtcuits. This electrostatic harvest feature was completly omitted from the patent documents - with good reason, yet the patent illustrations still retain most of the working hardware features. Recovered photos have yielded additional clues as to how the motor case was a part of the circuit. The insulated aluminum electromagnet mounting plates acted as 18 each capacitor plates with the case being used a common.

The real interesting action is how the interpole dielectric blocks were charged with an arc while the rotor and plate were at maximum capacitance. As the rotor turned the effective variable capacitor had less capacitance thus causing the voltage potential to increase (Like the action of an Electropours). After 13-2/3 degree of rotation this HV charge was harvested to recharge thee capacitors. After 2/3 rotation (will all the capacitors charged)the motor would kick into electromagnetic mode and pulse the "Major" electromagnets to provide classical torque for 1/3 rotation. Then drops back into the electrostatic mode. A large part of the excitation energy was also recovered but the real magic was the non-classical electrostatic process.

The OU is in the physics of the arc/dielectric interaction and the method used to extract the energy before it returns to the ambient from which it came. Timing is important. The charge has to be created and harvested in a narrow time window on the order of 11 mS. The large induced charge in the dielectric block quickly dissapates.

The harvest process caused all kinds of engineering challenges, some of which were not solvable in 1973. The first issue was the huge strain on the lead-acid battery that caused them to explode when they couldn't handle the HV harvest pulse. Next in line for failure was the induction transformers used to generate the intital charge in the main storage capacitors. The solution was to fabricate theses custom transformers much like automotive ignition coils which could handle 50KV or more. The purpose of the "Floating Flux Field" was to help protect the induction coils. The next weak point was the storage capacitors themselves. These were custom made MICA capacitors because this was the only local avaliable dielectric material that could deal with the sharp time rise pulse. There is some evidence that iron wire was uesed for the winding of the electromagnets - but its purpose is still unknown.

Another interesting historical discovery:

After financial doom in late 1977 after the FCC had confiscated the EMA6 motor. Gray and Hackenberger were funded by a businessman in Kansas. They worked there for 18 months then left in the middle of the night with their creation. It is called the "Blue Motor". This might have been Hackenberger's last attempt to "get it right" before his sudden death in early 1980. If this motor actually worked then the improved technology could be built in a much smaller frame than the original EMA4-E2. The Blue Motor was 8" in diameter and about 18" long. There is no information to date as to how well this motor worked or if it worked at all. But there is some important reason why Hackenberger stayed with Gray through these lean times when he could have gotten a good paying job and not drive a taxi cab to pay the rent.

The Blue motor (and it's predecessor the EMA6) are both thought to have combined the electromagnetic and electrostatic processes in the same cycle. This was acheived by using PM's on the rotor. Therefore an electromagnetic pulse was done at the same time the electrostatic process was taking place. Apparently these two processes didn't impact each other and certainly made for a cleaner topology.

I use to think that the E.V. Gray topology was simple (but well hidden) - its not and it gets more complex the more I dig into it. No wonder this technology was lost - even for those that might have had some idea as to what was taking place.


Spokane1

[EgmQC]

.........................
The Blue motor (and it's predecessor the EMA6) are both thought to have combined the electromagnetic and electrostatic processes in the same cycle. This was acheived by using PM's on the rotor. Therefore an electromagnetic pulse was done at the same time the electrostatic process was taking place. Apparently these two processes didn't impact each other and certainly made for a cleaner topology.
.........................


Spokane1

Dont forget there always a E field perpendicular to the Magnetic field and both happen in same exact time on any coil/straight wire/etc.

Best Regards,
EgmQC

[Spokane1]

Independant processes in E.V.Gray Motor

Dont forget there always a E field perpendicular to the Magnetic field and both happen in same exact time on any coil/straight wire/etc.

Best Regards,
EgmQC

Dear EgmQC

Point well taken and one that needs to always be addressesed when dealing with new exotic and non-classical technologies.

Allow me to elaborate on this point. I believe it is important and that serious E.V.Gray reseachers can benifit from my ongoing analysis of the evolution of this discovery. However all of this is my own professional opinion. Others can easily draw different and valid conclusions from the same body of surviving evidence. Its just that my data base is a little bigger than most.

In the beginning:

As best as I can tell what Andre Poppoff gave Gray was a novel coil popping citcuit that developed its HV using an automotive ignition coil. I don't know if this originally came from Dr. Tesla or not - I like the idea that it did. The circuit was mostly classical, however it had two novel features:

1.) The two opposing coils were connected in series such that there was a spark gap between them. This gap was located in the center of the coil assemble so that as the moving coil started to move the arc would stretch until it was quenched. For a DC HV arc this can be a substantial distance. This feature allowed some energy savings at the time of seperation since any left over charge would be stored back in the main capacitor rather than being dissapated in wasteful oscillations.

2.)Between the opposed coil assembly were two dielectric discs. The arc was designed to travel through holes in the middle of these discs such that the stretched arc had to travel through it and the dielectric surface. As the arc was fired the physics of the plasma/dielectric created an abundance of unpaired electrons (plus who knows what else) on the dielectric discs. This produced two highly charged surfaces that opposed each other and thus added to the thrust component of the coil lift.

It is unknown just who got the wild hair to take these principles and make a motor out of it. I tend to think that it was Gray's idea, so fundamentally he is still the father of this technology. If so, Marvin Cole was the mother who did 98% of the development and at a later date stumbled across the OU properties. In the beginning the idea was to develop an efficient DC pulse motor that may have had some market potential at the time.

The motors that are owned by Al Francour in Canada (the three pole EMA4 and EMA5) are early classical prototypes (circa 1963) where Cole was moving up to much higher HP versions. He already had smaller motors to establish the proof of principle for the "arc to rotor" concept. At this time Cole was focused on the electromagnetic repulsion process and let the electrostatic process languish for the moment. When he got his timing relationships worked out he added the dielectric blocks back to the design as sort of an after thought.

He was certainly surprised with the improved performance, but there were new problems. Now his motor was dischargeing arcs to just about every metal object in sight, not to mention all the breakdown arc action going on in the power supply. He didn't expect this response. Undauted he attempted to ground, shied, and isolate all the offending components. Large filter capacitors were one approach. But now these capacitors were becoming so highly charged that they rivaled the quantity of energy stored in his main capacitor.

The obvious solution dawned on him. Insead of attempting to inhibit this annoying static electric buildup why not collect it and use it to recharge the main storage capacitor? This would greatly reduce the unwanted buildup and might even add to the over all efficiency of the pulse motor. He then spent a couple of years exploring exactly just what was causing all the static electricity in the first place and how he could capatalize on it.

It appears that the fruits of this research resulted in the the dual electromagnet design. From my analysis the classical electromagnetic repulsion process and the non-classical electrostatic process require vastly different timing parameters. The electromagnetic process benifits from a relatively short very high current pulse. The electrostatic process requires a long current limited and high initial strike voltage source. The two different arcs also need different degrees of axel field intensity. An intense magnetic field is needed for the electromagnetic repulsion process. The Electrostatic process needs a much lighter field, but it appears that it still needs some to interact in some manor with the stretched arc.

At the time of Marvin Coles' departure he had developed a system that employed two sets of electromagnets. The 'Major' and the 'Minor' coils designed for differnet purposes.

From the pulse motor patent documents it is easily seen from the illustrations (Disregard the text) that the 36 'Major' electomagnets are energized in only 120 degrees of rotation. After that the 'Minor' electromagnets take over to do the Electrostatic process for the remaininig 240 degrees of rotation and recharge all the storage capacitors.

Hackenburger did advance the technology (but it took him some time to do so). He re-engineered the system so that the electromagnetic repulsion process could take place at the same time as the electrostatic charge- harvest process. To do this he employed Permanent Magnets on the rotor and eleminated the previous electromagnets (both Major and Minor) that were on the rotor. These improvements greatly reduced all the complex switching Cole was using to harvest and store the generated electrostatic charge.

I don't know how well Hackenberger's improved motor worked, but I'm sure it was close to what Cole had with the 9 pole EMA4-E2 but was much smaller, (8" vs. 16") compact, simple, and cheaper to build. To bad Hackenberger died (or was bumped off) at that moment (1980).

Unfortunatly Gray didn't have the technical expertiese to advance the work beyond this or even get the Blue Motor to run again with out screwing it up. Nor could he find an off the street technician to advance this work for him. But that didn't stop him from attempting to sell the "Concept" for the rest of his life.

I wish I could get my hands on that 'Blue Motor'

All this is just one person's attempt to connect the dots of the crumbs of technical information left behind. Presently I'm designing and building apparatus to explore the physics of a stretched arc as it travels over different dielectric surfaces. In about 6-12 months I can report if there is any substance to all of my these technical speculations.

Spokane1

[Jdo300]

Comparison of capaitive discharge circuit approaches

Hello All,

I have been reading through this thread for the past couple of weeks in attempts to catch up with all of the work that is being done here. Some of you may know me from OU.com as I was very active on the TPU research threads some time ago. But lately, I have been very interested in studying the "electro-radiant event" that Tesla discovered since it is clear that this is the key to most of the COP>1 devices out there.

At this point, I have setup a basic water spark plug circuit using an ignition coil driven with a 80uF, 450V cap and a mechanical switch (for simplicity sake) to dump the charge through the coil. My spark gap is a simple set of threaded rods with brass cap knuts on the ends that I can adjust the distance of. For the diode string, I have a set of two microwave diodes which allows the circuit to make nice plasma sparks.

What I am wondering is if anyone has tried to compare the plasma spark produced from the water spark plug circuit to the same circuit with a HV cap that is charged (of the same equivalent joules as the low voltage cap in the water spark plug circuit) and then discharged through the gap. If the effect is essentially equivalent, then this is very convenient since it is much cheaper to get low votlage, high capacitance capacitors as opposed to the large, expensive, HV caps.

Has anyone ever tried this comparison? Aaron, I believe you did a few things along these lines, what were your conclusions?

Thanks,
Jason O

[lamare]

Interesting comment by Tesla:

"Experiments with Alternate Currents of High Potential and High Frequency"

Each time the arc is broken between A and B the jars are quickly charged and discharged through the primary p p, producing a snapping spark between the knobs K K. Upon the arc forming between A and B the potential falls, and the jars cannot be charged to such high potential as to break through the air gap a b until the arc is again broken by the draught.

In this manner sudden impulses, at long intervals, are produced in the primary P P, which in the secondary s give a corresponding number of impulses of great intensity. If the secondary knobs or spheres K K are of the proper size, the sparks show much resemblance to those of a Holtz machine. But these two effects, which to the eye appear so very different, are only two of the many discharge phenomena. We only need to change the conditions of the test, and again we make other observations of interest.

When, instead of operating the induction coil as in the last two experiments, we operate it from a high frequency alternator, as in the next experiment, a systematic study of the phenomena is rendered much more easy. In such case, in varying the strength and frequency of the currents through the primary, we may observe five distinct forms of discharge, which I have described in my former paper on the subject before the American Institute of Electrical Engineers, May 20, 1891

The article he refers to can be found here:
"Experiments with Alternate Currents of Very High Frequency and Their Application to Methods of Artificial Illumination"

[lamare]

Today, I re-analysed Gray circuit and it looks like it works completely different than we suspected:

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewa...tml#post108329

[Slovenia]

Thanks Spokane1

Thanks for sharing this Spokane1!!!

Dear Aaron,

From my historical study, Marvin Cole started out with classical single electromagnets. One of his first motors was probably the 1 pole "EMA4" that Norm Wooten displayed at the 2000 Tesla Conference. I suspect that this motor was built in 1961. Gray, 2 decades later, took this same motor and had it rewound in 1981 so it could run on classical electricity from a 5KV classical power supply. Currently it is the property of Al Francour of BC. The next motor built was definatly the Nylon 3 pole "EMA5".

Then there was a huge transition in design style and Mr. Cole developed the 9 pole models. These were the very sucessful systems that generated the huge COP's. Here were the paired sets of "Major" and "Minor electromagnets on the stator and rotor. The EMA4-E1 was the zeneth of this technology. The eairler 10 HP 9 pole EMA2 was probably the model that was released to Crosby Research for their tests. (But this is just a guess)

When Marvin Cole left, never to return (1972), Gray hired Mr. Hackenburger to make improvements on the original design to make it more saleable (actually cheaper to build so Gray could completly control the technology). Unfortunatly, Hack did more to screw up the system than improve it. But it wasn't because he was stupid or didn't try, he just didn't know how the system really worked (and neither did Gray). His classical training casued him to consider a method using permenanment magnets on the rotor to simplify the maze of wiring in the commentator section of the EMA4-E2. He also developed the fixed spark gap tube (i.e. the CEST) during this redesign effort. This was the state of affairs when John Bedini visited in 1973. The CEST and all the other related power supplies were stretched out on a large table like a big breadboard in progress. John also claims that the actual motor he was using was a modified off the shelf industrial motor. I don't know if it already had PM's in it or not. But the field notes that were taken by Ron Cole at the time certainly shows a PM rotor. Hack was also using an atomotive distributer for the switching of his CEST system.

It is my opinion that the use of the PM's for the rotor was a step backward. Hacks motor, when finished, only put out 2 HP - so much for his enlightened approach. I would (and plan to) stick with the original design as shown in the patent plus all the stuff that I think was taken out of it.

What is missing in the patent is the fact that there were arcs being struck between the stator and rotor poles. These arcs were stretched across a dielectric surface. The "Minor" electromagnets provided a meger axle field to help stabalize this arc process. This same system was also used in the very first 3 pole motors (without the minor poles). Cole some how discovered that an axel field was needed to get the most out of the arc. It appears that this stretching process charges the opposing dielectric blocks to the same polarity and causes them to repell each other. They must be discharged some how in order for the next cycle to take place. I'm sure there are other things goin on in there as well. But the novel events all revolve around this electrostatic process (what ever it is) - not the classical electromagnetic repulsion that is also present. I think that Mr. Cole started with a purely magnetic repulsion motor using arcs between the stator and rotor (this was going to be the invention). He tripped over the impact of the dielectric somehow during his development. He was using large Delrin blocks to secure his electromagnets to the inside case. These attracted the arcs he was using to power his electromagnets during their power pulse. Somehow he noticed that he was getting out more energy in torque than what he was putting in. I bet that revelation kept him awake for a few evenings.

It took Hack about three years to figure out the importance of the same dielectric surface. in May of 1976 he threw out the CEST's and added back the dielectric arc surfaces. But the EMA6 was not designed to take advantage of this retro-fit. I don't know if this very late modification improved the performance of the motor or not. But it did generate a lot of EMF that brought the wrath of the FCC down on the project (1979). The FBI came in and confiscated everything. They later released some of the office equipment and files back to Gray. Both Gray and Hack continued working on this till the end of their lives.

After suffering two raids in the Free Energy Business it only shows you how strong Gray's and Hacks faith was in this technology that they went right back into this business as soon as they got some more funding from a couple of members of the Jewish community and a group in Kansas.

In the beginning (1973), when Hack was publishing his first engineering report the word electrostatic comes up 19 times. Do you know of anyone who has explored the electrostatic nature of this technology? It is difficult because none of it has been disclosed (except in this first report) but it is the heart of the secret. (according to me) One observer claims that when the motor operated it would suck your hair right towards it. Now that is an electrostatic phenomena, not magnetic. Dr. Tesla also use special dielectrics in the construction of his table top oscillators, the function of which has not been determined (that I know of) today.

Peter claims that the original EMA partership started out as the "Electrostatic and Magnetic Association" A short time later the word electrostatic was dropped. You won't find very much on the electrostatic function of this technology in the patent. I think it was removed along with the internal arc process, because that is where the OU comes from. (So I think)

Anyway, The use of PM's on the rotor was the beginning of Hack's screw ups, not the highest evolution of this technology.

Spokane1

[lamare]

After continueing with my analysis, this is where I am now. I think this is it:

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewa...tml#post108949

The basic theory for this can be found looking for Tom Bearden's "don't kill the dipole". Basic conclusion of that: the electric field comes for free. Potential (voltage) comes for free as long as you don't influence the charge carriers that create your dipole, your voltage source.

In the analysed systems, they all basically resonate two inductive loads in series, such that the overall load is resonating at full wave resonance, which is at 4 times higher frequency than the usual quarter wavelength resonance being used. When you resonate an open coil in full wave resonance, you get high voltage, zero current at the terminals, in phase. So there you have the basic connection to using the voltage source for free, but you have to figure out a way to do that without disturbing the charge carriers that give you the voltage source.

However, with a single coil, the current stays inside the coil, so you can't use that. So, when you split the coil into two, you get the current in the middle for free, provided you don't disturb your voltage source, your driving circuit. So normally, when you use the current, you will disturb the resonance, which will eventually also disturb your driving circuit, so you still have to provide current to keep the system in resonance and pay the price.

And here's the trick: the driving signal is delivered to the coil on top of a rectified carrier wave, which is fed into the circuit trough a high pass filter. Then, you get the current and the power, but the disturbances caused by using the power, cannot reach the driving circuit, because of the high pass filter! And then you finally got what you want. You can use your voltage source, without disturbing it, so then you don't have to pay the price.

And the final trick is to drive two identical loads in opposite phase trough quad half wave rectifiers, so the whole system is perfectly in balance and in resonance.

[Slovenia]

Thank You!!

Thanks for this Lamare!!

After continueing with my analysis, this is where I am now. I think this is it:

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewa...tml#post108949