Mr Lester J Hendershot's magnetic generator.

[GSM]

Hi Chris,

Glad of your discussion, I regard the Hendershot principle as being the way forwards -
not with hydrogen, engines, sparks, ions, or radioactivity; though the latter COULD be safe as well as simple.

Yes there are so many Mk3 generator drawings, also no clear photographs of the wiring on any of these MagnaTronic (his son Mark's name for the generator) devices reported to have worked.
The circuit I would regard as being the most likely candidate would have commoned L2's and twin capacitor connections, thus as you say - with a *virtual common ground* between the oscillating halves - as per Ed Skilling's drawings, the Arthur Aho versions drawn by Edward O'Brian, and Mark's 1995 updates, though not Mk3c versions where the C1/2 capacitor was not connected to L1 windings.

Like you I have considered hysteresis and a second harmonic, for timed second harmonic addition on a synchronously triggered '90 to 180' and '270 to 360' degree per cycle basis can indeed augment field induction.
However, there are also reasons why I discount such consideration;-
a) Lester's principle added E-W to N-S for cyclic 'rotary' addition;
b) core saturation would 'magneticly' limit transducible output;
c) harmonic field addition within the core would be wholly passive.

My original post is to suggest electron *spin axis (domain) rotation* within the core (spin within a spin having mutual 90 degree axes), this being quite different to the normal passive electron *spin axis precessions* effected within cores by alternating magnetic field inductions (including mutual between adjacent inductor coils) upon fixed domains.

One thing is for sure Chris - it is already 2012, and we have not even started yet !

Cheers ........ Graham.

PS. There is more here than I can test out, but there are aspects which can be tested.

[ChrisW]

At last...

Greetings Graham,

At last you've brought up my favorite subject -- Lester Hendershot. As there seems to be some "synchronicity"here, I guess it's time I divulged my thoughts on his device.

From the available schematics published by Aho, Hilton, et. al., it appears that the circuit "sloshes" a sine wave between the two L2s (bottom-most coils). The L1/C1 "simply"" assist in this process, assuming that L1/C1 are resonant with L2; it would also appear that C1 is charged by L2 electrostatically (damned interesting if that's true!) with the possibility of L3 and L4 contributing as well.

The portion of the circuitry involving L3, L4, the 1:5 transformer and the load are reminiscent of the Daniel McFarland Cook circuit, with secondaries wired phase-reversed to the primaries and vice-versa.

The heart of the circuit is the magnetic "vibrator." I'd be willing to bet that this little mechanical marvel induces a "kick" at the top and bottom of the waveform, thus adding a small amount of energy TWICE per cycle, caused by making and breaking its magnetic circuit, much akin to Flynn's parallel path, Leedskalnin's perpetual motion holder, etc.

The tuning of the L2s, as with the rest of the system, must be incredibly sharp, given the use of basket weave windings.This would go far in explaining why it was difficult to get it started, and Aho's mention that Hendershot often had to "squeeze" the basket weave coils before it would run. (i.e., slightly modifying the inductance and/or capacitance).

It's certainly possible that the two coil assemblies each produced a standing wave, and it has not escaped me that some interaction between the two might be occurring. As for a motional or rotating wave? Mmm... I'm not so sure about that.

As a mechanical analogue, I would say the device is like two people sitting in a bathtub, using their hands to push a wave of water back and forth, between each other. Timed just right (i.e., resonance) the wave would continue to get larger and more powerful with each push.

It seems to me the real secret of Hendershot's device is in his magnetic "vibrator" (for lack of a better term), being right on the raggedy edge of making and breaking the magnetic circuit -- hysteresis, if you will, the make and break caused by the slightest change in magnetization of the two "doorbell" coils, resulting from a current passing through them. This, in combination with a very touchy oscillator, would yield power galore, up to the current-carrying capability of the coils themselves. (And perhaps beyond, as Hendershot stated that sometimes the coils would burn up.)

One final point of interest is the use of the 80uF and 40uF capacitors, wired in series, with the negative leads connected together, thus functioning as a non-polarized capacitor overall. It seems to me this arrangement would always cause a flow, where the two caps are trying to balance out. (?) Also, the centerpoints of these two capacitor pairs are connected together, apparently creating a virtual ground. (?) A good understanding of this aspect has thus far eluded me, and I'm hoping some bright engineering-type here will shed some light on this for me.

I think I've explained it as best I can at the moment, so I'm looking forward to some discussion on it.

Graham, thanks for starting this thread! Perfect timing

Chris

[GSM]

Well...he was not alone. First was Alfred Hubbard in 1919. Frankly period between 1900 and 1930 was full of strange free energy inventions.

Hubbard used plain longitudinal coils with composite wire core and radium, all inside the sealed generator container.

[boguslaw]

Well...he was not alone. First was Alfred Hubbard in 1919. Frankly period between 1900 and 1930 was full of strange free energy inventions.

[GSM]

Lester J Hendershot had something which no one else did, an empirically based intuitive understanding of cored inductor characteristics; an understanding not clouded by supposed the 'scientific theories' of Physics.

Sadly Lester passed from this world in 1961; officially stated to be a suicide, though in circumstances unknown, and his design, though published, has not run since.

There were many circuit drawings of the Hendershot generator; nobody knew how they worked, and some were shown with wax pressed into the inductors. Lester was also the only person who could make them run, and so I off-handed the design as one empowered by radium salts embedded within the wax, whereby the alternating magnetic field would align the emanations with the coil windings and generate output.

Question. What else was happening during the late 50s ?
Answer. The 'Top Secret' development of military Masers.

This is where a Maser could more correctly be defined as the Molecular Amplification of Stimulated Electromagnetic Radiation, and hence any non-military citizens working on this same secret technology without formal authorisation would have been deemed an individual of notable concern.
Masers went up on satellites and are still up there today, ostensibly for peaceful purposess, but they really are extremely powerful beam weaponry devices and thus capable of intentional military destructive use !

Almost two years ago I designed the high Q resonant Ferrite Sleeve Loop Antenna. This was based upon an understanding of EM radiation (photons) and magnetism (electron orbit alignment), whereby the transducing coil overwind electromagnetically precesses electron orbit alignments within the ferrite molecular structure (domains) of the sleeve.
7" Longwave Ferrite Sleeve Loop Antenna Demonstration - YouTube

Which brings me to Lester's generator that I'm sure many subscribers here have already studied.

Lester also had also used 'ferrite sleeves' (steel) inside his tandem inductors, and he too induced electron orbit precession within the sleeves via L1 tuned overwinds.
However he also had L3 and L4 windings having capacitor coupled phase shifted currents wrt L2. The fields from L3 and L4, being at one end of the steel sleeve, would have set up a longitudinal (phonic) wave through the core.

In the correct type of steel an L3/ L4 field wave would affect the magnetic domains longitudinally, and if suitably tuned could set up an axial standing wave of molecular energisation along the length but having amplitude reaction normal to the core axis; possibly in the form of a single standing full wave.
This physically resonant longitudinal domain (electron orbit alignment) energisation would combine with the axial energisation of L1/ C1 tuning, whereby the electron spin precession induced by L1 in the portion of the core overwound by L2, would become toroidally rotational and thus statically generate considerable voltage within L2. The L2 potential thereby feeding both the load and regeneratively energising the phase shifted L3/ L4 wave.

Also the tandem pairing of identical coil assemblies would be essential to maintaining RF oscillation, due to the likelyhood of external loading overcoming the possibility of continuous oscillation due to capacitor damping via L3/ L4. Also the coupling would not just be longitudinal but via synchronously rotating fields.

No wonder Lester was the only person who could tune these devices, for clearly he understood the physical (phonic) resonance characteristics of his steel pipe resonator cores as well as their ferric inductance properties: And this in a way not comprehendable to men of 'science' in the 1930s, though sadly only too well understood by the military during the late 50s.

When I first designed and tested ferrite sleeve inductors I already expected them to have 'energy' uses. Further thoughts had me wondering about mechanically resonant phonic excitation from one end to generate tuned electron orbit spin induction at the other (full domain rotation within the body of the ferrite material), and then whist reading through the Hendershot notes again only last week I came to realise that Lester had already done this; decades ago !!!!!
Obviously he would not have subjected his children to the then well know risks of radium.

I had before asked myself the question of whether AC phonic end excitation coupled with other end tuned excitation on a single ferrite rod or sleeve core using transistorised oscillators could 'generate' electricity, and now I firmly believe that it could, but the molecular nature of the core would be of prime importance.

( This also makes me think of the observed incidence of OU in a TV tube deflection yoke earlier this year, with different windings on the two coupled halves ! )

Cheers ........... Graham.