Muller generator replication by Romerouk

[blochwall]

some info for you

what do you guys think of this

do you think C1 draw current from the battery?
and C2 as well through C1.



this works very well. Bit it different to what I would have believed.

note how each capacitor sits on top of the other one and the voltage is added up one cap at a time.

what will happen when we get to all 9 coils?

the important thing is there is no load on the motor. the motor run faster with every new stage. it going to take me a while to get a few more constructed as this is quite complex if you turn of the wrong stage first the voltage goes
sky High

@toranarod

I am sorry to clogg up this thread with something that might not be relevant but your post reminded me of a circuit I saw doing some research. There are some striking similarities to your proposed circuit above. Pay special attention to page 10 of the pdf below.

Considering that RomeroUK used a dc to dc converter, I thought this might be of special interest.

DC to DC buck booster circuit

Anyway, you seem to be heading in the right direction, at least from my limited perspective.

BW

[blackchisel97]

progress

Well, it looks like this is getting more interesting, at least for me atm. I started playing with coil spacing, different caps values and Bloch Wall in each coil Resonance is a powerful force. Funny, when I connected coils in series at first I was thinking in conventional way. I was wrong, not the first time lol. I can dead short DC side of the bridge and rpm remains the same. I'm still not tuned 100% but at least I see what's going on.


V

[Itsu]

Cap value

Hi Guys,


scratchrobot, i think i see you are using a 47uF polarised cap, so be aware that this cannot handle AC very good and are likely to "puff", so be carefull.
You can put 2 polarised caps back to back (+'s together) to substitude for a bipolar cap.

Concerning the series cap value, take note that when using coils with inductance in the 2 to 10 mH range and frequency of the puls in the 150Hz range, the cap needs to be in the 400uF range to obtain resonance, see one of the many resonance calculators on the web like:

CalcTool: RLC or LC circuit calculator


Regards Itsu

[totoalas]

Rotor Drive motor Voltage Limiter

Hi to all
after installing the neogen coils and jt circuit...... finally dsmantled
and installed a dc motor as driver
Ceramic magnets on the base lowered the voltage feed from the wall adaptor
This rig will be used for coil to rotor sweetspot
and then install one gen coil at a time.... still waiting for magnetite powdr

cheers

totoalas

YouTube - ‪Muller gen Drive motor Volt Limiter 220611.avi‬‏

[nvisser]

Well, it looks like this is getting more interesting, at least for me atm. I started playing with coil spacing, different caps values and Bloch Wall in each coil Resonance is a powerful force. Funny, when I connected coils in series at first I was thinking in conventional way. I was wrong, not the first time lol. I can dead short DC side of the bridge and rpm remains the same. I'm still not tuned 100% but at least I see what's going on.


V

Hi V
I also tested that today. The resonance is huge. Only problem if you tap from it you kill it. A dead short on the bridge output is like connecting a parallel cap with the coil. Parallel resonance and you then effectively have 0V over your bridge output.
When you connect a load on the bridge output you kill the resonance.
Hector from the EVGRAY group extract from the resonance using what they call diode plugs. They only extract the sine wave peaks. I have to try that but think I will rather first try shorting the coils at the sine wave peaks as I already build a circuit to do that.
This document will give you some ideas of how they do it although it does not look like Romerou use this principles.
Directory:Transverter - PESWiki

[toranarod]

@toranarod

I am sorry to clogg up this thread with something that might not be relevant but your post reminded me of a circuit I saw doing some research. There are some striking similarities to your proposed circuit above. Pay special attention to page 10 of the pdf below.

Considering that RomeroUK used a dc to dc converter, I thought this might be of special interest.

DC to DC buck booster circuit

Anyway, you seem to be heading in the right direction, at least from my limited perspective.

BW

thanks blochwall
the PDF you linked me to is very helpful.
at least it encouraging to continue on with this work.
the project has been hard work all my circuits needed to be designed to handle the hi voltage. so lots of time with the soldering iron.
I will post any results i find that help towards OU

you are all doing great work on the romerouk
cheers

[blackchisel97]

Hi V
I also tested that today. The resonance is huge. Only problem if you tap from it you kill it. A dead short on the bridge output is like connecting a parallel cap with the coil. Parallel resonance and you then effectively have 0V over your bridge output.
When you connect a load on the bridge output you kill the resonance.
Hector from the EVGRAY group extract from the resonance using what they call diode plugs. They only extract the sine wave peaks. I have to try that but think I will rather first try shorting the coils at the sine wave peaks as I already build a circuit to do that.
This document will give you some ideas of how they do it although it does not look like Romerou use this principles.
Directory:Transverter - PESWiki

Thanks M8
Last night I managed to pull enough to get 22 LED as bright as possible from one coil set and cap in one AC branch. It didn't kill resonance and I have 100uF across DC side however, wave was distorted a bit at its peak. I tried several caps and play with coils distance. Also, biasing with extra magnets makes a big difference. My rotor spins at about 2500 rpm. No speeding under the load yet but we'll get there.
I agree on extracting peaks of maxed sine wave. I need to push harder and determine the peak first so I can get as much as possible. This is my definition of having fun. I wish I could get better rotor and bearing assembly.

Quick update, just tried shorting DC side (screwdriver resistance) and only couple rpm loss.


Vtech

[Rhamnousia]

Introduction

Oops, thought it hadn't posted...

[Rhamnousia]

Introduction

Hi all,

I'm new to the OU community, and find the experimentation fascinating. Got tipped off about the Muller generator recently and looked at Romero's youtube videos.

I'm a skeptic, so forgive me - what I just don't get is how anyone expects to get more power out of the Muller device than they're inputing, without violating Conservation of Energy.

Hopes and wishes are wonderful things, no question. But nobody can extract more energy than exists in a system. The problem I see is that it requires energy to get the Muller generator to rotate at a given rpm. Call that E1
Then you try to extract energy from this rotational energy, call that E2. E2 cannot exceed E1 unless an additional energy source is added somewhere.
(Even if the 'motor' were 100% efficient, E2 still has to be smaller than E1, else the thing loses energy at some significant rate - it cannot be self-sustaining)

But where is this required energy supposed to come from? I don't get it. I haven't seen a physics theory that covers this part of the OU device.

And this makes the device different from any other energy source concept I've come across - energy typically is stored first by nature, in the form of Wind, Solar, Water, Geothermal or Nuclear. We invent devices to drain some of this energy and use it for our own needs.

I see no source of energy in these OU devices, neither the Muller nor Romero version, except from the batteries used to get the things spinning. Which is fine. Don't get me wrong, these things are interesting experiments. Can anyone enlighten me?

[Farmhand]

Hi all,

I'm new to the OU community, and find the experimentation fascinating. Got tipped off about the Muller generator recently and looked at Romero's youtube videos.

I'm a skeptic, so forgive me - what I just don't get is how anyone expects to get more power out of the Muller device than they're inputing, without violating Conservation of Energy.

Hopes and wishes are wonderful things, no question. But nobody can extract more energy than exists in a system. The problem I see is that it requires energy to get the Muller generator to rotate at a given rpm. Call that E1
Then you try to extract energy from this rotational energy, call that E2. E2 cannot exceed E1 unless an additional energy source is added somewhere.
(Even if the 'motor' were 100% efficient, E2 still has to be smaller than E1, else the thing loses energy at some significant rate - it cannot be self-sustaining)

But where is this required energy supposed to come from? I don't get it. I haven't seen a physics theory that covers this part of the OU device.

And this makes the device different from any other energy source concept I've come across - energy typically is stored first by nature, in the form of Wind, Solar, Water, Geothermal or Nuclear. We invent devices to drain some of this energy and use it for our own needs.

I see no source of energy in these OU devices, neither the Muller nor Romero version, except from the batteries used to get the things spinning. Which is fine. Don't get me wrong, these things are interesting experiments. Can anyone enlighten me?

I'll take a shot at this but I don't want to clutter this thread with my theories and musing's. People only have theories if you want actual proof you will need to prove it to you're self.

I'll make a thread shortly titled " Transformers, Coils and Free Energy theories". Where we can all discuss these things.

Cheers

[toranarod]

Hi all,

I'm new to the OU community, and find the experimentation fascinating. Got tipped off about the Muller generator recently and looked at Romero's youtube videos.

I'm a skeptic, so forgive me - what I just don't get is how anyone expects to get more power out of the Muller device than they're inputing, without violating Conservation of Energy.

Hopes and wishes are wonderful things, no question. But nobody can extract more energy than exists in a system. The problem I see is that it requires energy to get the Muller generator to rotate at a given rpm. Call that E1
Then you try to extract energy from this rotational energy, call that E2. E2 cannot exceed E1 unless an additional energy source is added somewhere.
(Even if the 'motor' were 100% efficient, E2 still has to be smaller than E1, else the thing loses energy at some significant rate - it cannot be self-sustaining)

But where is this required energy supposed to come from? I don't get it. I haven't seen a physics theory that covers this part of the OU device.

And this makes the device different from any other energy source concept I've come across - energy typically is stored first by nature, in the form of Wind, Solar, Water, Geothermal or Nuclear. We invent devices to drain some of this energy and use it for our own needs.

I see no source of energy in these OU devices, neither the Muller nor Romero version, except from the batteries used to get the things spinning. Which is fine. Don't get me wrong, these things are interesting experiments. Can anyone enlighten me?

Hello
Rhamnousia

Welcome to the fold. you have every right to be skeptical most of us have been doing this for years.

I can only speak for my self when I say I believe in something better and desire a cleaner and better balanced world.

I know all the laws of Physics and having built and tested many devices I have seen theses laws first hand. I have learned to except them so we work on ways around them and make then work to our advantage. Well that's the task.
I have seen things that are contradictory too. So I push on looking ever deeper and hard at the problem.

I have a lot of fun building machines that look like something from HG wells Time machine or SiFi move. if nothing else they create an interesting talking point at dinner. LOL

Hope to see you around and good luck
Rod

[blackchisel97]

Hi all,

I'm new to the OU community, and find the experimentation fascinating. Got tipped off about the Muller generator recently and looked at Romero's youtube videos.

I'm a skeptic, so forgive me - what I just don't get is how anyone expects to get more power out of the Muller device than they're inputing, without violating Conservation of Energy.

Hopes and wishes are wonderful things, no question. But nobody can extract more energy than exists in a system. The problem I see is that it requires energy to get the Muller generator to rotate at a given rpm. Call that E1
Then you try to extract energy from this rotational energy, call that E2. E2 cannot exceed E1 unless an additional energy source is added somewhere.
(Even if the 'motor' were 100% efficient, E2 still has to be smaller than E1, else the thing loses energy at some significant rate - it cannot be self-sustaining)

But where is this required energy supposed to come from? I don't get it. I haven't seen a physics theory that covers this part of the OU device.

And this makes the device different from any other energy source concept I've come across - energy typically is stored first by nature, in the form of Wind, Solar, Water, Geothermal or Nuclear. We invent devices to drain some of this energy and use it for our own needs.

I see no source of energy in these OU devices, neither the Muller nor Romero version, except from the batteries used to get the things spinning. Which is fine. Don't get me wrong, these things are interesting experiments. Can anyone enlighten me?

Yes, valid points. First one; this isn't closed system as nothing in nature and Universe is. Those laws ( or theories) are referring to the closed systems as created artificially.
Second point; Indeed, I haven't seen one either. We're writing a new one. About time.

Ah, by the way - those devices converting one type of energy into another with poor efficiency were designed by skeptics. There is lots of them.

V

[electr0n]

Hi
Progress so far, ive read the following thread Shorting coil gives back more power , where romero was experimenting with coil shorting, later in the thread he stated he used caps to do the shorting rather than solid state devices, which made me think about the two .33uF ac caps on each driver...which look like they parallel over the supply rail, however when i hook mine up it makes no difference to the motor pulse signal or supply rail waveform. so i tried hooking one leg of the ac cap to the negative supply and the other to the emitter of the tip42c
and have a ringing wavform movable over the sine by positioning the hall. (this driver is triggered via small magnets on the rotor as per romero), possibly the small duty cycle generated by the driver would provide a coil shorting pulse for some of the generator coil pairs (the ones ladden with bigger magnets?), so i isolated the side hall driver and used it as a load for the generator coils...tring to keep everything par to the known electronics in romeros setup.. anyway it does slow everything down so far, ive tried on 2 different coils and am now testing the rest...blown up a few halls..smoke..even had bird chirping noises :P..maybe i need a holiday
all the best
Jim

[pault]

... without violating Conservation of Energy. ...

Ask yourself: if you have a point charge in space, you can measure its energy at a given time. Come back a half hour later and re-measure its energy. What do you expect the measurement to be? Does that violate Conservation of Energy?

I haven't seen a physics theory that covers this part of the OU device.

Try reading Turtur's work, e.g. http://www.energeticforum.com/renewa...tml#post144823

Or try Tom Bearden.

Or try Paul Laviolette.

pt

[142857]

Ask yourself: if you have a point charge in space, you can measure its energy at a given time. Come back a half hour later and re-measure its energy. What do you expect the measurement to be? Does that violate Conservation of Energy?



Try reading Turtur's work, e.g. http://www.energeticforum.com/renewa...tml#post144823

Or try Tom Bearden.

Or try Paul Laviolette.

pt

Where is this magical "point charge" in space? How do I measure it? it's like an electric ghost or somthing?

That prolly violates everything anyway.