Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Donald Smith Devices too good to be true

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by level View Post
    Ok, I see you were talking about doing this on the secondary rather than on the primary, but I think the result will be the same. In one case you are generating the counter EMF due to driving the primary with a current, and in the case of the secondary windings, you are generating the counter EMF due to the magnetic flux generated by the primary winding. I believe it is the same end result however. See my previous two posts, posted today.
    Our main target is Lenz force ( Lenz's law - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ) so we must generate magnetic field with opposite poles to Lenz force. If these additional coils are in series to secondary coil L2 the strength of counter-magnetic field will be regulated by the load automatically. The primary coil or magnet should not get any resulting reaction to what is going on secondary. As soon as this would be achieved the maximum inducing magnetic field should be drawn from magnets so motor-generator is the best option...

    Comment


    • When a motor turns a generator rotor and the magnets pass the coils a
      potential is caused in the generator coil and a current if there is a load. This
      is the result of Lenz law, Lenz Law is the mechanism of the transformation of
      mechanical energy to electric energy, If Lenz is cancelled or nullified then no
      transformation of mechanical to electrical energy would occur.

      Lets just surmise you can cancel all Lenz effect and the motor turning the
      generator see's no load and does not transform any mechanical energy to
      electrical energy. Then what will generate the electrical energy and where will
      this energy come from if not from the motor driving the rotor ?

      If you spin a magnet past a coil with 2 Ohms resistance and only 10 UH with a
      100 Ohm load not much electrical energy will be generated and not much Lenz
      effect will be encountered. If you spin a magnet past a coil with 2 Ohms
      resistance and 100 mH with a 100 Ohm load then much more electrical energy
      will be generated and more Lenz effect will be encountered because more
      mechanical energy is converted to electrical energy.

      No Lenz effect, no generation effect I think.

      Why not just wind a coil so that it is totally self cancelling as Level describes
      a bifilar coil with the wire ends at one end of the coil both connected. Then
      swing a magnet past it and see how much output comes from the coil.

      Even a regular generator coil with no load will cause some lenz effect because
      of the capacitance of the coil, this means the coil can be charged with
      current and it will oscillate. A high impedance coil with a lot of inductance and
      capacitance could cause significant Lenz effect even without a connected
      load.

      As Level states a truly Lenz-less coil is basically just a resistance.

      That's my opinion anyway.

      Does anyone have a device with a permanent magnet rotor working so this
      can be tested ? I guess I can do it if I get time soon. I've got a bifilar coil of
      a few hundred uH with hardly any resistance wound on a iron powder core.
      I just need to set up a rotor again.

      Cheers

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Farmhand View Post
        If you spin a magnet past a coil with 2 Ohms resistance and only 10 UH with a
        100 Ohm load not much electrical energy will be generated and not much Lenz
        effect will be encountered. If you spin a magnet past a coil with 2 Ohms
        resistance and 100 mH with a 100 Ohm load then much more electrical energy
        will be generated and more Lenz effect will be encountered because more
        mechanical energy is converted to electrical energy.

        No Lenz effect, no generation effect I think.
        Well, logically following not always result same as reality.
        You can check another videos before it gets deleted:
        ELECTROMAGNETIC INDUCTORS - YouTube
        AMAZING INDUCTION - YouTube

        Some hidden truth is out there...

        Comment


        • T-1000 is right.

          Comment


          • Who can explain Lenz law to me ? Maybe we can learn something together .....

            Comment


            • Originally posted by T-1000 View Post
              Our main target is Lenz force ( Lenz's law - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ) so we must generate magnetic field with opposite poles to Lenz force. If these additional coils are in series to secondary coil L2 the strength of counter-magnetic field will be regulated by the load automatically. The primary coil or magnet should not get any resulting reaction to what is going on secondary. As soon as this would be achieved the maximum inducing magnetic field should be drawn from magnets so motor-generator is the best option...
              Sure, I understand what the Lenz Effect is and what you are aiming for, just not sure it will work the way you are intending. The best bet is always to build it and try it and see how it works. The Lenz effect occurs whether you are driving a coil with a current (such as in a primary), or in the case where you are driving a coil with a varying flux (such as in a secondary). In either case an opposing reaction occurs. Yes, I have seen skycollection's videos on youtube and I am curious if his coils can really appear to not be a load to the rotating magnets on the generator rotor. I would like to experiment with it, but have to wait till I can find time some time.
              Last edited by level; 03-26-2013, 10:10 PM.
              level

              Comment


              • Originally posted by boguslaw View Post
                Who can explain Lenz law to me ? Maybe we can learn something together .....
                My understanding in basic terms is that Lenz's Law describes why an inductor behaves as an inductor. My descriptions may not be entirely correct as Lenz may have intended his description for a specific case, but I think Lenz's Law really does apply in all the cases described below, but this is just based on my own understanding.

                Here are two different scenarios to consider:

                (1) When you apply a voltage to an inductor, it induces a current in the inductor, and as the current is building up to its maximum value it generates a corresponding increasing and expanding magnetic field in and around the inductor. As this expanding magnetic field builds up, it's expanding flux lines cut the coils of the inductor and induce a voltage in the inductor which is in opposition to the voltage we are applying to the inductor. This induced opposing voltage is termed 'counter EMF' or 'back EMF'.

                (2) When you apply a changing magnetic flux to an inductor using an electromagnet or moving permanent magnet, the changing magnetic flux lines cut the coils of the inductor and induce a voltage in the inductor, which in turn induces a current in the inductor. This current that is induced in the inductor in turn generates a magnetic field in and around the inductor coil which is in opposition to the changing magnetic flux which we applied to the inductor. This will generate an actual physical repulsing force on the electromagnet or permanent magnet we are using to apply the varying magnetic flux to the inductor. In this case, this is not a counter EMF, but a counter magnetic field that is produced, although the EMF that is produced in the inductor is oriented in such a way that the current it produces generates a magnetic flux that is in opposition the magnetic flux we are applying. So in that sense I guess it is still a counter EMF as well that is induced.

                So, more simply, Lenz's Law tells us that an inductor will act in such a way as to try to oppose any change we are trying to introduce to its current. If it has no current and we try to induce current flow in it, regardless of whether we are applying a voltage to the inductor or applying a varying magnetic flux to the inductor, the inductor will act to try to oppose this change in current.

                Also, if we have a current already flowing in an inductor and we try to stop that current from flowing in the inductor, an inductor will act to try to keep that same current flowing. For example, if we open the circuit on an inductor that has current flowing in it, such that current can no longer flow in a complete circuit through the coil, the inductor's magnetic field will start to collapse and consequently the collapsing magnetic flux lines will cut the coils of the inductor and cause an increasing voltage to be generated in the inductor which is oriented in such a way as to try to maintain the current flow in the coil. If we have an open circuit, eventually the voltage climbs high enough that there is usually a spark that occurs on the switch contacts, which discharges the energy of the coil in a last blast of current created by the spark. This increasing voltage that occurs due to the collapsing magnetic field is not termed a counter EMF, since it is not countering an applied voltage, but this is still an effect of Lenz's law I believe (or maybe Lenz's law in reverse), since the inductor is still acting to oppose change to its current.

                Again, this is just my understanding.

                Last edited by level; 03-26-2013, 11:32 PM.
                level

                Comment


                • Originally posted by T-1000 View Post
                  Well, logically following not always result same as reality.
                  You can check another videos before it gets deleted:
                  ELECTROMAGNETIC INDUCTORS - YouTube
                  AMAZING INDUCTION - YouTube

                  Some hidden truth is out there...
                  Hi T-1000,

                  I would like to shed some light on a hidden truth in skycollection setup.
                  He uses the LED lamps and I do not know their exact type (DC voltage, and current) let's assume they are 12V LED lamps, ok?

                  You can see that these lamps start to give light only above a certain RPM, i.e. from above a certain output voltage. Under this "threshold" output voltage there is NO load across any of the output coils, unfortunately, just because the LEDs do not draw current they remain dark. When the output voltage increases to higher level than the threshold of the LED ON voltage level, they become bright of course. It seems that the maximum RPM is able to feed the LEDs to illuminate brightly but I do believe during this maximum RPM the input current has increased too! Unfortunately Jorge does not show input current in the first video at all, and in the second video with the ball magnet we can see ampermeter fluctuating from say 0.6A to 0.9A but do not know anything else.

                  Why I say this? Just think it over: a LED does not have current draw under its forward threshold voltage when it is dark. And when it starts conducting in the forward biased state, current suddenly increases. This happens to take place near the peak voltages of the output waveform only!

                  Say you have 26V peak to peak AC sinusoidal voltage induction with normal zero crossings in your coil and you have a LED lamp of say 12V forward voltage threshold: as long as the AC waveform does not exceed 12V as it comes up from zero crossing, the lamp will not draw any current. Jorge uses full wave bridges across his output coils so the positive and negative AC waves are say all positive (i.e. normal full wave rectification) and the LED's positive is connected to the diode bridge positive for sure: meaning that the full AC output waveform is NOT loaded during either the positive or the negative duration of the waveform when it comes up from zero crossing towards the instantenous positive 12V or goes down from zero crossing towards the instanteneous negative 12V, ok?

                  Current can only be drawn by the LEDS when the waveform is above the positive 12V peak value (i.e. voltage would go up to positive peak 13V but it cannot because the LED cuts it to 12V)
                  and similarly when the waveform is below the negative 12V peak value (i.e. would go down to negative 13V but it cannot because the LED cuts it again to -12V portion till the waveform turns back and reduces towards again -12V as passing the real peak).

                  I hope this is understandable and I believe this is the hidden truth... I am not saying pancake coils are not useful, far from this, but in this particular setup these coils are NOT loaded by at least during the 75-80% of the full wavetime, they are loaded only in the rest.

                  Jorge should be convinced somehow to show us a test where he uses a high wattage resistor as the load instead of the LEDs because resistors DO load the output waveform during 100% of their time.

                  Regards, Gyula

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by gyula View Post
                    Hi T-1000,

                    I hope this is understandable and I believe this is the hidden truth... I am not saying pancake coils are not useful, far from this, but in this particular setup these coils are NOT loaded by at least during the 75-80% of the full wavetime, they are loaded only in the rest.

                    Jorge should be convinced somehow to show us a test where he uses a high wattage resistor as the load instead of the LEDs because resistors DO load the output waveform during 100% of their time.

                    Regards, Gyula
                    Well, the main focus on this case is - there is no drag when LEDs are on and when Jorge switches off his pulse motor, the rotor still spins free and the LEDs are still lighted up...

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by T-1000 View Post
                      Well, the main focus on this case is - there is no drag when LEDs are on and when Jorge switches off his pulse motor, the rotor still spins free and the LEDs are still lighted up...
                      Yes but notice that the LEDs finish lighting very soon after the switch-off and their still lighted up duration is much shorter than the spin down time.
                      And we do not know whether there is drag or no because no input current change is shown, just by our ears we cannot judge it correctly: what if the full rpm state is set by the drag? I know this sounds cruel... but may be the case.
                      Resistor loading is needed....

                      Comment


                      • No Lenz = No Power

                        Hi T-1000,

                        In your sketch you show the secondary windings on the same core. You say you want the coil in the middle to be the power generating coil and the coils on the end to be wound in the opposite direction to cancel the Lenz effect. I think what you are missing is when you wind those outside coils in the opposite direction you will cause them to be energized with a voltage that will oppose the voltage of the power coil. Yes you will cancel the Lenz effect of the power coil because now it won't be able to supply any current to your load. There is a commercial device that uses this same principle. It is called a buck-boost transformer. If it is wired so the current is reversed in one of the coils then the voltage is reduced. If the current is going the same direction through both of the coils then the voltage is added. I am sorry but your idea is not going to work. But to satisfy your own mind why don't you wind some coils and see for yourself.



                        Originally posted by T-1000 View Post
                        Hi,

                        Seems it is always better with drawing so I made quick sketch for better understanding with what I am trying to say. Hopefully it will be more clear picture what calculations are needed for.
                        My first foughts on that setup - the primary would not be affeted and secondary would generate volts/amps from available magnetic field in iddle running primary. So no OU on that stage. But as soon as you swap it to magnets and spin them from electrical motor the result will change drastically to OU device because there will be no drag introduced when loading motor-generator coils...
                        Respectfully,
                        Carroll
                        Just because someone disagrees with you does NOT make them your enemy. We can disagree without attacking someone. This means YOU especially BroMikey.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by hotrod68r View Post
                          hi gyula. thankyou also for your input and the merlib rv. pointer. i read "cancelling lenz laws-methods", overunity.com. wondering if synchronous rectification with mosfets, or something like it could replace the diodes and/or could a transistor be timed to play with coil shorting in my current setup to reduce the deficit ? cheers.
                          Hi hotrod68r,

                          I edited your schematic to show a possible 'syncronous rectifier' solution to place first in parallel with one of your existing diodes so that you could see its positive effect what hopefully happens: the resultant rectifier will have a less than 100-150mV drop only instead of the present 300-350mV your diodes have.

                          The 100-150mV drop is a rough and worst case estimate from me, this depends on entirely the ON channel resistance of the MOSFET used. Say you use N-channel type BS107A it has ON resistance under 10 Ohm, 2N7000 has about 5 Ohm, BS170 has 1.2 to 5 Ohm, these all have TO-92 casing (not SMD style).
                          For P-channel types there are BS250 with about 9 Ohm, known also as TP0601L or T, VP0610L or T, the case style is also TO-92.

                          Of course there are many many other types, I deliberately choose the some hundred mW dissipation types with max 150-400mA drain current ratings because these have much smaller inner capacitances than the power MOSFET types. You can use what you can obtain easily, if you write which big component seller you prefer (Farnell, RS Components, Digikey etc etc), I will try to look for what I think is good here, ok?

                          All you would have to do is build a P-channel and an N-channel circuit as shown in my drawing, the coupling coil could be similar to the one you now use for the bipolar NPN transistor, you would two more of them. the resistors across the gate-source pins helps to discharge the gate capacitance to speed up the switch-off of the MOSFETs. The N-channel MOSFET will switch-on for the positive waveform of the oscillating AC wave and the P-channel MOSFET will do it for the negative parts of the AC waveform, I assume normal zero-crossings in the induced waveforms. Observe the placement of the N and P channel types with respect to your D1 and D2 diodes.

                          Gyula
                          Attached Files
                          Last edited by gyula; 03-26-2013, 10:50 PM. Reason: correction

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by T-1000 View Post
                            Hi,

                            Seems it is always better with drawing so I made quick sketch for better understanding with what I am trying to say. Hopefully it will be more clear picture what calculations are needed for.
                            My first foughts on that setup - the primary would not be affeted and secondary would generate volts/amps from available magnetic field in iddle running primary. So no OU on that stage. But as soon as you swap it to magnets and spin them from electrical motor the result will change drastically to OU device because there will be no drag introduced when loading motor-generator coils...
                            Hi T-1000,

                            Could explain how you imagine swapping the core with magnets if you mean that? The best would be again a simple drawing if you do not mind, unfortunately I do not get you what I indicated in bold above.

                            Gyula

                            Comment


                            • This guy is working on a proof that the calculated lorentz force is not always accurate. Here is one of his experiments.

                              Lorentz experiment

                              His written proof is here:

                              PengKuan's Paradoxes on Electromagnetism: Lorentz parallel action experiment

                              This information may be helpful to experimenters.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by T-1000 View Post
                                Well, logically following not always result same as reality.
                                You can check another videos before it gets deleted:
                                AMAZING INDUCTION - YouTube

                                Some hidden truth is out there...
                                Seriously people

                                Q1: Do you think skycollection came up with this?

                                Q2: Do you think it is his Neo ball magnet that is inducing current in all the coils below it?

                                A1: No, he did not come up with this idea. So there should be no need for him to claim copyright.

                                A2: No, the coils below the neo magnet are induced by the 800ma current sent from his power supply to the top coil to turn the ball magnet. See what happens when he turns off the power supply at the end of the video. All the coils instantly stop producing output.

                                I would be embarrassed to post such a video.

                                You want something impressive! then watch this 3 year old video with a neo ball magnet that keeps spinning when the power to the coil is shut off Even if he carries the neo ball 8 feet away it keeps spinning: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tA4yXevToQc

                                Don't follow the work of people like skycollection that claim copyrights and don't share how to build. This will lead you to more ignorance. Do your own experiments or follow only those who fully share.

                                Luc

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X