Design flaw in MEG control circuit (as well as Flynn replications)

[lamare]

I have recently been looking into the Motionless Energy Generator of MEG for short and found a design flaw in the control circuitry, namely the use of freewheeling diodes.

I've written a short article on the problem as well as the solution, which you can find on my website and may be updated later:

http://www.tuks.nl/wiki/index.php/Ma...emMEGCircuitry

The short version:

Let's take a look at Naudin's v1 schematic:

Naudin_MEG_v1.jpg

Notice the freewheeling diodes D1 and D2?

A freewheeling diode is used in inductive circuits to provide a path for the current when the driving voltage is suddenly reduced or removed. It prevents voltage spikes that can occur due to the inductive kickback, protecting the circuit components.

However, in this case this is not a good idea, because this way the coils get shortcutted and all the energy that is put in to energize the coil gets burned up by the diode.

In the v2 schematic, these are still there, but integrated in the BUZ11 mosfets:

Naudin_MEG_v2.jpg


An elegant solution is to use an asymmetric bridge converter, with this picture showing a triple bridge converter:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Switch...ower_circuitry

Asymmetric_Bridge_Converter.png


Hopefully this helps someone to finally obtain a working free energy device.

I've attached a pdf with the current version of the article.

[lamare]

Have been working on a controller for the new MEG, which is based on an open source BLDC controller, so once the layout is finished and pcb's have been made, we will have a versatile pcb that can be used for the MEG, but also for driving BLDC motors using an asymmetric bridge, rather than a driver with freewheel diodes. The schematic as I have now can be found on github (along with the kicad files):

https://github.com/l4m4re/BEMF_Contr...controller.pdf

The design contains three bridges as well as three cap banks, which are switched between series and parallel using diodes, as I described before:

http://www.tuks.nl/wiki/index.php/Ma...ecoveryCircuit

This idea is also a solution to Bedini's problem of not being able to "close the loop" in his school-girl design. The solution to that problem is to switch both sides of the coil.

[Rakarskiy]

MEG Highlights.

Wise Eye OverUnity: MEG (rakatskiy-blogspot-com.translate.goog)

[lamare]

MEG Highlights.

Wise Eye OverUnity: MEG (rakatskiy-blogspot-com.translate.goog)

No one ever got the thing to self run AFAIK, so one needs to take the COP claims with a grain of salt, IMHO.

However, the design flaw I discovered would have killed any potential OU effect, which is why I'm planning to test a MEG with a new controller design.

The schematic is now finished, so next step is to layout a pcb and build one:

https://github.com/l4m4re/BEMF_Contr...controller.pdf

[Rakarskiy]

I'm very glad you feel that way. The question of whether you've tested your idea in hardware. I have made a half-bridge, and plan to use an even more complex half-bridge with software, multi-level switching for the MEG. Except that's not the question. You can't have two excitation and generation EMFs in the core window at the same time.
I wish you to be convinced of this or to refute my assertion.

[lamare]

I'm very glad you feel that way. The question of whether you've tested your idea in hardware. I have made a half-bridge, and plan to use an even more complex half-bridge with software, multi-level switching for the MEG. Except that's not the question. You can't have two excitation and generation EMFs in the core window at the same time.
I wish you to be convinced of this or to refute my assertion.

Nope, haven't tested anything yet, still in the design stage.

I'm not sure what you mean by your "assertion".

In any case, the idea of the MEG is to have one permanent magnet and two possible paths for the flux to go through, one of which will be "chosen". Same principle as the electropermanent magnet:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electropermanent_magnet

Best to watch this video, wherein the principle is demonstrated and explained:

https://youtu.be/no50_5iSr2Y?si=EIV8itg97dKmOEma

One of the questions with respect to the core is: how many magnets should be used?

This is why I have ordered I bar ferrites, so I can construct a flexible core and experiment mechanically with it to make sure the core does not go into saturation:

MEG_3_0_Ferrite_Core.jpg

See article for more details:

http://tuks.nl/wiki/index.php/Main/D...emMEGCircuitry

And github project for the controller I'm working on:

https://github.com/l4m4re/BEMF_Controller

[Rakarskiy]

Just in case, all magnetic systems rely on the magnetic induction parameter, which in ferrite isJust in case, all magnetic systems rely on the magnetic induction parameter, which is difficult to achieve in ferrite above 0.2 Tesla. I recommend to study the electromechanical devices design course, in the electromagnetic generator section.

[lamare]

Just in case, all magnetic systems rely on the magnetic induction parameter, which in ferrite isJust in case, all magnetic systems rely on the magnetic induction parameter, which is difficult to achieve in ferrite above 0.2 Tesla. I recommend to study the electromechanical devices design course, in the electromagnetic generator section.

I've taken a quick look at your page on electromechanical devices and I see you are familiar with vector calculus. In that case, you may be interested in my work on a new aether theory, based on the discovery of the quantum circulation constant, kinematic viscosity or diffusivity k, with a value equal to light speed c squared but a unit of measurement in [m^2/s], which will sooner or later lead to a revolution in physics (see eq. 2):

https://github.com/l4m4re/notebooks/..._physics.ipynb


I'm not sure what you mean by "magnetic induction parameter", but the cores I ordered are designed for power transformers and made of N87 material:

https://www.digikey.nl/short/5v47vr3q

The datasheet of the N87 material can be found here:

https://www.dxtmagnetics.com/wp-cont...03/pdf-n87.pdf

At 25 degrees Celsius, the flux density is specified at .49 Tesla and at 120 degrees at .39 Tesla, so the value you mentioned appears to refer to magnetic flux density.

However, I don't see the problem here, because if that wasn't enough for handling a decent amount of power, it wouldn't be used in power transformers.


Further, the core is specified to be usable up to 500 kHz, which gives plenty of room for experimenting with a higher frequency MEG replication. After all, it's not so much the flux density that counts, its the amount of flux (density) that's being switched between the two possible paths per second.

As far as I can tell, the important part is to not get the core into saturation, which is why I opted for a flexible core design, so I can play with the amount of magnets and find out how many would be best. The simple test that only one bar sticks to the rest of the core as shown in the demo video should at least give an idea of how many magnets should be used.

[Rakarskiy]

Magnetic induction is a vector physical quantity that is a force characteristic of the magnetic field, namely the characteristic of its action on moving charged particles and on bodies with magnetic moment.
Standard designation: ; the unit of measurement in SI is tesla (T), in GHS is gauss (Gs) (relationship: 1 T = 104 Gs).
The magnitude of magnetic induction appears in a number of the most important formulas of electrodynamics, including Maxwell's equations.
To measure magnetic induction is used to measure magnetic induction . It can also be found computationally - in a static situation it is sufficient to know the spatial distribution of currents.

Magnetisation or magnetic induction is a measure of the state of a material and is measured in tesla (T).

Magnetization - Wikipedia

I found out that in transformer operation, the magnetic induction of the core is only important for the operation of the field winding.
Power transfer occurs in the intercurrent electromagnetic flux.
When you rely on transformer power when calculating a generator, you fall into the trap of a common misconception about the operation of this device.

A simple example: if there is a gap in the core, the transmission power should decrease because the resultant value of the core magnetic induction will decrease.
In fact, the transmission power increases because the primary winding circuit needs more energy to reach core saturation.

When you get the cores and see for yourself. Good luck.

My post on transformer operation: Free Energy Ukraine - Transformer (1-ua--hho-do-am.translate.goog)

[lamare]

My post on transformer operation: Free Energy Ukraine - Transformer (1-ua--hho-do-am.translate.goog)

I've used ChatGPT for translating, quite a lot better than Google Translate. This part is well worth reading and considering:

30594128.jpg?_x_tr_sl=uk&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=ru&_x_tr_pto=wapp&_x_tr_enc=1.jpg

There seems to be some misunderstanding between us regarding why we need self-induction when discussing the operation of a transformer, which works on the principle of mutual induction. This is because academic physics considers the phenomenon of EMF formation in the secondary winding during mutual induction as electromagnetic induction, or self-induction. On the left, there's a slide from Wikipedia, and on the right is our sketch based on the data we have just reviewed.

76738897.jpg?_x_tr_sl=uk&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=ru&_x_tr_pto=wapp&_x_tr_enc=1.jpg

If we accept the rule that the secondary winding operates according to the principle of self-induction, or electromagnetic induction, in our scenario, which we are considering, there is a complete inconsistency. The inconsistencies I see remind me of a collective scientific confusion about the phenomenon of mutual induction. Firstly, in different turns in the window zone of the core, we see varying vector electric field intensities, which can be explained by electrostatic polarization of the conductor in an electric field. In this case, the positive sign of the electric field should be at the end of the winding (the beginning of the winding is marked with dots), which coincides with the polarization of the self-induction phenomenon. But the most important aspect is the direction of the currents in the primary and secondary windings. If in the primary winding (excitation of the magnetic flux) everything coincides with the right-hand rule, then the direction of the current in the secondary winding contradicts this rule.

This is a good point. I did an experiment a while ago, essentially a repeat of Wheatstone's 1834 experiment to measure the speed of electricity:

http://www.tuks.nl/wiki/index.php/Ma...ansmissionLine

We later repeated the experiment, whereby we laid the wires out in straight lines, in opposite directions. Then, to my surprise, the faster than light signal was gone, or at least we couldn't measure it anymore.

Now the difference between the two experiments is that in the first experiment I had a (folded) closed loop, while in the second I had straight lines. This illustrates the point exactly: one cannot have a (DC) current carrying wire without a closed loop, or closed circuit, and with our current EM based technology, that also goes for AC.

With Tesla's single wire (transmission line) technology, things are a bit different and there is no magnetic (rotating) field, but I would agree that the right hand rule is not applicable to a current carrying (straight) wire, but does apply to a current carrying closed loop. So, when you fold your fingers around the loop, your thumb points in the direction of the magnetic field generated by the closed loop (circular) current.

Secondly, if you conduct an experiment, the positive sign of electrical polarization will be on both wires at the beginning of the windings. You don't believe me? We'll sort this out later.

It depends on whether your putting energy into the magnetic field or when you're drawing energy from the magnetic field. This is why freewheeling diodes are used in most inductive drivers, like in the original MEG as well as Naudin's replication.

For now, here’s my version of the transformer’s operation. What phenomenon is fundamental in the action of mutual induction? I believe it’s the inter-conductor "capacitive" connection (let's call it that) and the magnetic vortex field coupling around the conductor.

I agree that the magnetic field _is_ a vortex, but I don't think the inner turn capacitance is responsible for the coupling of the current on the surface of the conductor and the magnetic field.

The magnetic field of the core amplifies the "capacitive" connection and magnetic flux linkage.

Let's first ask the question: what _is_ current?

When we consider Ampere's law in it's original form (i.e. without Maxwell's addition of the displacement current):

J = curl H,

within my model, wherein Maxwell's bug is fixed:

https://github.com/l4m4re/notebooks/..._physics.ipynb

We can consider current density to represent what is known as turbulence in fluid dynamics.

Now since we agree that the right hand rule does not apply to a wire, but to a closed loop, we find that when there is a difference between angular frequency omega of the aether rotating within the closed loop (wire) and the aether rotating within the magnetic vortex outside the wire, we obtain friction and/or turbulence on the surface (and the internal) of the wire and *that* is what we call current.

In other words: the coupling is not via capacitive coupling, but via turbulence aka current at the interface between the inside and outside of the wire.

Thus, the magnetic field of the core in no way forms EMF in the secondary winding (this can be considered an imposed theory of academic absurdity). Simply calculate the EMF of the secondary circuit using the transformer EMF formula.

As long as there is a difference between angular (rotation) speed of the magnetic vortex concentrated within the core and a number of closed loop windings around the core, the friction because of that differential manifests in the shape of a current, which on it's turn relates to an electric potential difference at the terminals of the coil.

Another point is if you apply an air gap in the core, but the magnetic induction parameter in the core will sharply decrease, the current parameter in the primary winding will increase, and accordingly, the current in the secondary winding will also increase. This is direct evidence that the core’s magnetic flux cannot form EMF in the secondary winding. Thus, the positive potential on one side of the wires in the transformer window can be explained by this phenomenon. Next, the flux linkage of current strength and magnetic induction between the winding wires.

57066659.jpg?_x_tr_sl=uk&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=ru&_x_tr_pto=wapp&_x_tr_enc=1.jpg




On this picture, we find what I call Maxwell's bug:

curl E = -dB/dt

When you look at the definitions of the fields in my model, you will see that I derive all fields directly using the vector Laplacian, the second spatial derivative in three dimensions.

What this does, is establish a Helmholtz decomposition of the field I put in, normally the velocity field v multiplied by the quantum circulation constant k:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helmholtz_decomposition

In physics and mathematics, the Helmholtz decomposition theorem or the fundamental theorem of vector calculus states that any sufficiently smooth, rapidly decaying vector field in three dimensions can be resolved into the sum of an irrotational (curl-free) vector field and a solenoidal (divergence-free) vector field.

Since the electric field forms the irrotational half of the Helmholtz decomposition it is cur-free and therefore cannot and does not have a curl!

Really, one cannot get away with violating the fundamental theorem of vector calculus forever, not even if your name is Maxwell or Einstein for that matter.

I'll keep it at that for today.

The current strength and magnetic induction around the conductor are the same phenomenon, only in different measurement systems: Electrical system - Current Strength (Amperes); Magnetic system - Magnetic Induction (Teslas). Closer to the principle of operation is the magnetic measurement system. The current strength in electrical circuits manifests precisely the action of magnetic induction. (Detailed in my work "EMF and CURRENT"). If we accept this fact as the basis, the magnetic flux linkage is very well explained considering capacitive interaction. From the physics course, we know why conductors with current repel or attract each other. The reason is the vector of Magnetic Induction and Ampere's force.

88506281.jpg?_x_tr_sl=uk&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=ru&_x_tr_pto=wapp&_x_tr_enc=1.jpg

We know that if the current strength has a common direction in the wires, then the magnetic induction of both wires is enhanced, which would immediately affect the magnetic flux in the core. In a transformer, the magnetic flux equals the magnetic intensity of the primary winding, which forms the magnetic flux. We also know that the current strength in the transformer windings has the opposite direction. In the drawing above, where the current strength has the opposite direction, the electrical polarization also has the opposite orientation. Suppose that two wires are placed parallel in a magnetic field, which is formed by one of the conductors connected to a voltage source (in the transformer window, all wires of the primary and secondary windings are parallel). The second wire is connected to the load. We see that only one electrical "capacitive" polarization of the secondary conductor from the primary, and the formation of magnetic field flux linkage (currents), can occur. In fact, this is one circuit, the source "sees" the load considering the losses on the flux linkage interaction. There is also the issue of connecting the source with induced EMF in the load circuit. Such a source and its connection fall into the category of "Current Generator". What this means can be found in the material "EMF and CURRENT", and transformers are calculated proportionally: in an exemplary case, Us/Up = Ns/Np = Is/Ip, where index [p] denotes values related to the primary winding, and index [s] — corresponding values for the secondary winding, U — voltage, N — number of turns, I — current strength. Thus, the transformation of voltage and current strength in a transformer is determined by the number of turns in the primary and secondary windings. Voltage is proportional to the number of turns, while current strength is inversely proportional to it.

Practical Confirmation!

24263886.jpg?_x_tr_sl=uk&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=ru&_x_tr_pto=wapp&_x_tr_enc=1.jpg

At one time, I made a circuit for desulfating lead-acid batteries. The goal was to create a reverse pulse current during battery discharge to create conditions for plate desulfation. How does the circuit work? During the transistor's on period, the primary winding is excited, and the transformer forms a magnetic flux in the core. In the secondary winding, with minimal current due to high resistance on the LEDs, a mutual induction pulse is formed. The heart of the control is a monostable multivibrator on a 555 timer. After the excitation pulse is turned off, the self-induction pulse formation system is triggered. Only the primary circuit is closed for current flow, forming electrical polarization with a high voltage parameter. The transistor must be high-voltage. But the secondary winding, thanks to diode VD2, closes the circuit with the battery, which in this episode becomes the load. The self-induction pulse formed in this winding discharges into the battery. After the self-induction pulse is completed through the circuit, the current from the battery passes through the optocoupler and turns on the next excitation and self-induction pulse. And everything repeats. This circuit is the clearest example of how a transformer works, confirming our conclusions. Below is a photo of the assembled circuit and an oscilloscope image of the current taken from a 1-ohm resistor connected to the battery’s negative terminal. The excitation pulse is in blue, and the self-induction pulse is in yellow.

[lamare]

Small demo of the core for my MEG (English subtitles):

[lamare]

Using ChatGPT I now also have a method to estimate the diameter of magnet to use, which I've written down on this notebook:


https://github.com/l4m4re/notebooks/...EG_stuff.ipynb

This appears to confirm that the 17 mm diameter magnet I used in the demo clip is just within the saturation limits of the core I used.

[Rakarskiy]

Maxwell had no error, per se. He wrote down Ampere's law for Magnetic intensity in the electrical system of measurement. Why did he do that? Probably wasn't definitively sure, or it would have been too revolutionary (in principle it is still revolutionary now)
Left slide (Maxwell), Middle is a modern physicists' refinement (converting electrical induction to voltage, and combining Ampere with Bio-Savar). , the third is my variant based on the obviousness of the facts, thus the Ampere equation in the electrical system of measurement translates into electromagnetic induction.
Many people will not like it, but this is what I have come to and many paradoxes have opened up for me, which turn out not to be paradoxes.

551772334.jpg

I would like to note that I introduce two kinds of magnetic field (Bm - external magnetic induction with its source) and (Bi - magnetic induction around a conductor where the source is the electric induction around the conductor).

Serge Rakarskiy DC MOTOR and GENERATOR ELECTRODYNAMICS OVERUNITY

Once again about my version of the electromagnetic circuit, based on which I refined Maxwell's equation to the Ampere force

4484464.jpg

[JenkoRun]

Hi Rakarskiy, I was going through your post on Transformers and this section stood out to me that I believe needs to be revaluated:

"Another point is that if an air gap is applied in the core, but the magnetic induction parameter in the core will decrease sharply, the current parameter in the primary winding will increase and, accordingly, the current in the secondary winding will also increase. This is a direct proof that the magnetic flux of the core cannot form an emf in the secondary winding."
- https://1-ua--hho-do-am.translate.go..._x_tr_pto=wapp

This claim is in fundamental contradiction to known field phenomena in transformers, please see the following instance for example:
https://youtu.be/Q9YsuEeCTqs?t=1366

As you can see, the TriField meter responds to the soft iron core when physically struck and only in magnetic mode, showing that the iron core is creating a changing magnetic field in response to mechanical stress.

With the aid of another I have verified this effect to influence the windings of an off the shelf transformer (I don't remember what type it was) and physically striking the core with a metallic object did indeed induce an EMF in the windings and was measurable on the oscilloscope, further experiments showed ferrite cores may have a weaker response compared to laminated cores (experiments were not controlled).

If as you claim, that the magnetic flux of the core cannot induce an EMF in the secondary winding, then the above examples could not have occurred.

Kind Regards -R

[Rakarskiy]

Hi JenkoRun!

The magnetic field in the core of a traditional transformer, when it works, is only related to the current strength of the primary winding. I don't want to convince you of this (you have to figure it out for yourself), but a transformer is a voltage converter in an electrical circuit between source and load. There are many factors involved in its operation.

The first factor is how the current is generated in the primary-to-source circuit. In this topic [EMF and CURRENT] I have shown on my fingers and elementary derivation of the proportion, the current strength of the complete circuit and its section, by solving a physics problem for a schoolboy, what ‘materialists’ do not want to recognise. The primary winding of a transformer is the load element for the voltage/current source. A voltage drop must occur in the primary winding to produce a current force and consequently a magnetic field around the conductor, which excites the field in the core. The question is how much does the field in the core exceed the field around the conductor? [Magnetization of steel. Magnetic permeability]

The second aspect is the direction of currents in the primary and secondary winding, If we follow the conventional logic, the magnetic field in the core should be equal to zero (or doubled as in a generator), but it is equal to the power of the primary winding. From these factors, the iron core is calculated for the power of the transformer.

The third factor is the impossibility of applying the transformer EMF formula [E = 2πΦf / √2 = 4.44Φf ] to the secondary winding when there is no gap and with one. Physicists generally dismiss it because they cannot explain the nature of its action and call it an engineering formula. I claim that this formula is absolutely suitable for generators with a core and determines the anapole moment of EMF driving. With this my research can be found in my publication [Invention of electromagnetic generator].

Regards.