Topic: The new generator no effect counter B. EMF part 2 ( Selfrunning )

[vidbid]

Article

What we did find was an article that indicates occupants of the Branch Prison Muaradua are the creators of this design, whether Ramadan is one of them or not that slipped the information to Syair, we do not know. What we can suspect is Syair may no longer be free to disseminate any additional info. I say that because all energy generation is strictly controlled and managed by the state.

This may be the article that is being referred to. Warga Binaan Rakit Genset Tanpa BBM - BAROMENTER OKU SELATAN

Google Translation





There you have it.

Regards,

VIDBID

[gyula]

Hi everyone,
...

I find the waveform to be different then the standard and would like the opinion of others as to why you would think this would make a difference in a generator.

I also noticed the wave form is quite different depending on how wide the core I manually move over magnets and coil.

...

Hi Luc,

Have been thinking on the induced waveforms you have shown. I assume you tried to apply the same speed for all the 3 cores by your hand, right?

When I first saw your scope shots, I recalled Naudin's test with two orientations for a coil, where he moved a magnet in front of the coil, then tangentially to the coil, see here: http://jnaudin.free.fr/images/magconfig.gif from his site The Mini-Romag explanation ?
I think the right hand side setup shown in the picture gives a similarly shaped induced voltage you received, even though there are certain differences, I think the tendency is similar.
What I mean on similarity is that all 3 induced voltage waves of yours start with a small (negative) peak which suddenly goes up and peaks in one or two (positive) peaks, then suddenly goes down and change sign again and ends in a small (negative) peak. The order of the peaks (negative) and (positive) could be upside down, depending on the NS or SN placement for you parallel magnets, just like in case of Naudin if he had used a South pole up instead of the North up, his waveform would have started with a small positive polarity first as the S pole moved from left to right.

For your U core and the wide core the 'split into two peaks' of the single positive peaks comes about, I think, because these two cores are able to bridge directly the two magnets with overlaps and the flux of the perm magnets (mainly in the top part) would prefer closing via the appearing U or wide cores when they are just above the magnets symmetrically and most flux on top is "sucked" away from the coil core and goes through the moving cores. This is not so for the moving thin core that cannot form a shunting bridge for the facing magnets.

Which waveform would make a difference in a generator, you ask. I would prefer the U shaped core but with its thickness matching the length of your magnets (now the U core thickness is less than the magnet length if I see it correctly). The U shape gives the biggest flux change out of the three I think and perhaps you wish to consider moving an U core under your magnet-coil setup too, now you show the U core moves only above the setup of course. This way the flux change could be even higher in the coil core. I mean two U cores moving alltogether as a rotor, sandwiching the stator magnets + the coil whenever they pass but then the total setup would become 'clumsy'... Cheesy surely a mechanically better setup could be devised.

Gyula

[Tishatang]

Hi All

Here is a replication around the year 2000 of James German patent.

Generator from James W

If you scroll to near the bottom of the page, James German himself makes the statement that it is a tuned circuit. Not shown in patent. Also caps would be needed, also not shown.

Orig presenter said this unit was based on German patent. If so, then how does one get it to resonant freq by just turning it by hand?? Also, if the presenters can afford good meters and magnets, then why can't they afford a good camera with hi res video? For these reasons, I think hoax.

After talking to inventor, the replicator of this patent got only small fraction of power out to prove principle of no load reflected back to supply. But this could just be because in a semi resonant state, one can harvest some energy out of a reactive circuit without it being reflected back to the supply.

Gotoluc showed one could harvest reactive energy without it being reflected back to supply. I have proved this to myself also by driving a motor with reactive power; By putting a load on the motor and even stalling the motor, and there is no reflection back to the supply. I don't have well equipped lab to measure my output, but I would guess better than this replication?

I hope I am wrong and I don't want to discourage anyone. But someone has done this before. Maybe there is something else going on that I am missing?

[gotoluc]

Hi Luc,

Have been thinking on the induced waveforms you have shown. I assume you tried to apply the same speed for all the 3 cores by your hand, right?

Thank you Gyula for taking the time to write your thoughts and comments.

Yes, I did my best to keep the movement at the same speed for each test.

When I first saw your scope shots, I recalled Naudin's test with two orientations for a coil, where he moved a magnet in front of the coil, then tangentially to the coil, see here: http://jnaudin.free.fr/images/magconfig.gif from his site The Mini-Romag explanation ?
I think the right hand side setup shown in the picture gives a similarly shaped induced voltage you received, even though there are certain differences, I think the tendency is similar.
What I mean on similarity is that all 3 induced voltage waves of yours start with a small (negative) peak which suddenly goes up and peaks in one or two (positive) peaks, then suddenly goes down and change sign again and ends in a small (negative) peak. The order of the peaks (negative) and (positive) could be upside down, depending on the NS or SN placement for you parallel magnets, just like in case of Naudin if he had used a South pole up instead of the North up, his waveform would have started with a small positive polarity first as the S pole moved from left to right.

Yes I agree, it is similar waveform to JLN test but a much quicker change in my test setup as you have noticed.
The waveform reverses by moving the core in the other direction.

For your U core and the wide core the 'split into two peaks' of the single positive peaks comes about, I think, because these two cores are able to bridge directly the two magnets with overlaps and the flux of the perm magnets (mainly in the top part) would prefer closing via the appearing U or wide cores when they are just above the magnets symmetrically and most flux on top is "sucked" away from the coil core and goes through the moving cores. This is not so for the moving thin core that cannot form a shunting bridge for the facing magnets.

Yes, I would agree with your observations on why the difference of waveform when using the thin core which cannot bridge the gap between magnets.

Which waveform would make a difference in a generator, you ask. I would prefer the U shaped core but with its thickness matching the length of your magnets (now the U core thickness is less than the magnet length if I see it correctly). The U shape gives the biggest flux change out of the three I think and perhaps you wish to consider moving an U core under your magnet-coil setup too, now you show the U core moves only above the setup of course. This way the flux change could be even higher in the coil core. I mean two U cores moving alltogether as a rotor, sandwiching the stator magnets + the coil whenever they pass but then the total setup would become 'clumsy'... Cheesy surely a mechanically better setup could be devised.

Gyula

Actually, what I was trying to ask is, do you think any of these waveform would make a difference if this was a generator output and if you do why.

The magnets distance is exactly the U core distance (center to center) The width of the magnets happen to also be the width of each core leg.

I agree, if we had U cores on each sides it should double or more the output.

Luc

[gotoluc]

Here are a few more tests.
The difference is, I separated the magnets so the U core can only cover one magnet to coil core and also tried it with a long solid core. The pics should explain the test.

Luc

[Dog-One]

How about this...

Have a read:

Noticias selección Valdeandemágico


Then take an old generator off your shelf and rewind it with insulated steel wire.

Can't be any more simple than that if it's for real. I just wouldn't try shorting the output.

[BroMikey]

Good Thinkin

Yeah great experimenting. Tell me more.

Mikey


[QUOTE=gotoluc;267988]Here are a few more tests.
The difference is, I separated the magnets so the U core can only cover one magnet to coil core and also tried it with a long solid core. The pics should explain the test.

Luc

[marxist]

using generator's lenz force for acceleration

Clip #1 shows the setup.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W2NfmyyhbZs

Clip #2 shows the entire run.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TV_dm8COKBY

Short clip of actions.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iFWin-crxQY

I can show a speed up under load or short circuit using almost any gen coil with a core, some inductance, some capacitance and a prime mover.

Hi Farmhand, hope you read this thread.

I find your latest videos, showing the speed-up-under-load effect, very educational. Your setup being quite straight forward, with only few parts, placing magnets with alternating polarity (north up, next south up, next north up, ...) helped me to finally understand the effect.

I think if you'd place the magnets closer together (using more of them) the effect would manifest at lower rpm. Do you agree?

However, have you got any plans to change the setup so as to exploit the effect even more? If so, what changes are you planning?

Thanks

[gyula]

....
Actually, what I was trying to ask is, do you think any of these waveform would make a difference if this was a generator output and if you do why.
.....

Hi Luc,

Regarding your question: I assume you are curious whether such kind of setup may make a low drag or a low Lenz kind of generator?
Well the short answer is that I do not know for sure. A bit longer response, though it still will not give a definite answer, would be this:
Lets find out what happens when your coil is loaded? My guess is that it might be a low Lenz setup because the counter flux from the load current seems to make the coil core less 'attractable' by the magnet flux than in the unloaded case.

When your coil is not loaded the U shape core needs a certain input power to keep it in motion, the drag against the motion is the attract force the magnets flux causes by "jumping" back and force between the coil core and the moving core. OF course this drag or rather a mechanical cogging can be minimized by clever mechanical setup.

When your coil is loaded the counter flux by the load current should work against the magnets flux, reducing the attract force by the magnets flux I think. This may unbalance the earlier mechanical balance (of the unloaded case) in the cogging issue and may reduce a little the input power to the prime mover (this latter sounds good). Again, this effect may be compensated too but the phenomena may introduce load dependence.

The limits of flux density in the cores are to be considered, including the load current, to avoid or at least reduce core saturation.

All in all, my guess is this generator setup may have a low Lenz effect, and whether this is already enough for a COP>1 performance can only be answered by trial and error, unfortunately.

If I still have not answered your question, then please ask for the third time too but please rephrase it a little.

Regarding your latest repositioning the magnets test: waveforms are widened, but the basic waveforms stay, whether the average power in the previous and in this latest waveforms is similar or not: by the look of the curves the areas covered look more or less similar to me. How a waveform wider in time duration may influence or not influence for instance Lenz law behaviour: common sense says Lenz law follows suit... but again this is to be tested.

Gyula

[vidbid]

Steel Windings?

Have a read:

Noticias selección Valdeandemágico

Then take an old generator off your shelf and rewind it with insulated steel wire.

Can't be any more simple than that if it's for real. I just wouldn't try shorting the output.

I read that post at that site. It made for an interesting read. It's certainly something that should be looked into.

I liked the post so much that I decided to re-post it here.

LEEDSKALNIN - THE IRON MAN

I have just pieced together a bit of the jigsaw puzzle, which has haunted me for close to a decade.

Questions

What makes Lenz Law applicable to the contemporary power generation?
What underlying principle causes magnification of magnetic field initiated by a coil under electric current? [As it is a known fact that a given coil with an iron (ferromagnetic if you insist) core produces much stronger magnetic field than the same coil without the iron core.]

Why did Ed Leedskalnin say: "I made more electricity with steel than I ever made with copper"?

What kind of electric generator did Ed Leedskalnin attempt to patent in the US according to his own claim, a patent application which has never appeared on US patent Office records?

What has really happened to Ed Leedskalnin? This is the same man who lived alone in his majestic Coral Castle without paying a penny to an electric utility company having no hydro hook up. Yet he had electric power available on the premises without any known source. This man tried to patent something with which electricity can be produced, a generator. This man has disappeared one day leaving only a note on his door: "Gone to the hospital". He allegedly dies two days later in the hospital of cancer. Not a single witness to his last trip, no one claiming to have given him a ride. Did the man, who should have been laid down on his death bed, really walk for miles to get to the hospital?

Answers
1. It is only now when I have realized the significance of my experimenting with diamagnetism and its impact on the contemporary power production and the Lenz Law. This experimenting reveals that diamagnetism is only a temporarily induced property.

Diamagnetism is caused by induction of circular (eddy) electric currents within some materials, copper being one of them. As an external magnetic field approaches copper (let copper stand in for any diamagnetic material), eddy currents induced within copper create their own magnetic field, which always opposes the polarity of the induction field. Therefore the copper is temporarily repulsed by the approaching external magnetic field, disregards its polarity. This repulsion eventually disappears as the eddy currents within cease to flow. Once the magnetic field is being withdrawn from the copper, the diamagnetism reverses and now the copper follows, or appears to be attracted by the external magnetic field. This is the underlying principle behind the Lenz Law effect in copper coil assisted standard power generation.

2. Ferromagnetism is again caused by induced eddy currents within the ferromagnetic material (let iron stand for all ferromagnetic materials). The differences between diamagnetism and ferromagnetism are as follows:

Iron material structure organizes itself under the influence of an external magnetic field for the duration of that influence, as opposed to diamagnetism.

Ferromagnetism is always attractive, as opposed to diamagnetism, which is directionally alternating.

Iron has the capacity to grossly enhance the density of the external magnetic field, as opposed to diamagnetism, which never even matches the density of the external field. The ferromagnetic enhancement is caused by domain restructuring. While diamagnetism only induces eddies in the existing crystalline structure, ferromagnetism also changes the material structure by blocks (domains).

3. Ed Leedskalnin has stated "I made more electricity with steel, than I ever made with copper", because he has found out during his experimentations that induction of steel wire coil by a magnetic field always caused attractive force between the inducing field and the field of the induced coil, as opposed to a copper coil. This means that a magnetic rotor finger approaching a steel coil is attracted to that coil. As it retreats, it is again attracted to it. This comes to a wash and there is no net back torque on the rotor except for friction.

4. Following that, Ed Leedskalnin had built a generator with steel wire windings, or more likely rewound an existing one securing for himself his own source of free electric power. He lived happily ever after till the time when his vanity got better of him and made him to apply for a patent on his invention. Only that this is the big No-No explicitly spelled out in US Patent Office regulations. US Patent Office will not issue a patent for anything, which is claimed to provide free energy or, in their own language, a perpetual motion machine. Because Ed's was an over unity device, Ed's patent application has never made it into the US patent office records, never mind ever being granted.

5. And, because someone got somehow hold of Ed's patent application and found out (or knew) that the thing worked, Ed Leedskalnin had suddenly died "of cancer".

Source: Noticias selección Valdeandemágico

Regards,

VIDBID

[Dog-One]

The Obvious...

I read that post at that site. It made for an interesting read. It's certainly something that should be looked into.

I liked the post so much that I decided to re-post it here.

Yes Vidbid, I know we can do this. We are just missing something obvious that will become that way once we hit on it. It's something our books and our brains continue to overlook because we "think" we already know what will happen, so we never try it. If we do try it, it's quite likely we will find ourselves building devices like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=amHKKlnUVSw

It just cannot be that difficult.

[wantomake]

Iron coil test

Hello to All,
Has any one tested and posted (YouTube or here) results of iron wire coils verses copper coils?

I finally found some iron wire on eBay I could try put want to know if there is proof already.

Or has this thread ended?

I hope not,
wantomake

[IndianaBoys]

Hello to All,
Has any one tested and posted (YouTube or here) results of iron wire coils verses copper coils?

I finally found some iron wire on eBay I could try put want to know if there is proof already.

Or has this thread ended?

I hope not,
wantomake

Hello Wantomake,

Bedini has a couple videos that may be of interest:

Nathan Stubblefield / Edward Leedskalnin Iron coil Monopole Motor.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k8vnHVV25tU

Nathan Stubblefield / Edward Leedskalnin Iron coil Monopole Motor 2.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uPOhmJgyUME

[wantomake]

Interesting

Thanks IndianaBoys,
I watched both and very informative. Hope to set up some test if possible.

Thanks again,
wantomake

[shylo]

insulation

Very interesting ,Does the iron wire need to be insulated from itself like copper?
artv