Confirming the Delayed Lenz Effect

[Farmhand]

Carmen Miller- NEMCA talk on Muller Magnetic Motor - YouTube

Skip ahead to 41 mins and watch through 48 mins.

Yes but that's a Muller, it uses the asymetrical relationship between the rotor and stator forces to reduce drag from cogging. And he's actually got a computer controlled one. Very cool.

In my simple way of looking at things cogging is different to Lenz, because cogging will happen without any power being developed like when turning by hand. But Lens I think is caused by electricity. So eliminating cogging should not automatically eliminate Lenz. I don't think.

When the generator is spinning its magnets past the coils with no load at normal speed there is some drag, then when if all go's well when power is drawn, before the sine wave is dragged down (which causes lens to show and slow the motor) limiting the output the generator, the motor (prime mover) will increase power to overcome it so there is more power availiable for more load.

Otherwise you just ran out of output.

The higher impedance of the coil and the higher frequency I think will seriously limit the ability of the coil to output power. But I might be wrong.

I still don't get it. A Muller is different.

[Shadesz]

Avoiding more extra drag that you just created by adding more coils.

This needs to be tested, theory is just not good enough. And will only get us so far. It's obvious adding one coil adds drag. Why would a second coil not also add drag initially ? So you would only ever be able to avoid the drag you make. In my opinion.

It should be tested.

Cheers

P.S. I'm happy to be shown I'm wrong. I actually hope I am wrong.

Carmen Miller- NEMCA talk on Muller Magnetic Motor - YouTube

Skip ahead to 41 mins and watch through 48 mins.

[Farmhand]

I like to think of myself as a realist not a skeptic. So the way I see it I could be doing some people a big favor. If i'm right it could save a some people a lot of money, and considering the danger involved with high speed rotors with magnets stuck to them, I could be saving somebody's life.

Overunityguide, has a very good setup, and seems willing to test things. We should take advantage of that. If I were interested enough to find out the truth I would even go so far as to send some money to him to help meet the extra costs of more coils to test it. But I have other things to do. And I'm fairly sure of my thoughts on this.

Like I said I hope I'm wrong.

Will the regenerative acceleration also work if the prime mover is a windmill or a water wheel or a horse ? Or will it only work when using an electric motor as the prime mover ?

I'm not keen on seeing my horse get sped up by the generator into overunity.

Cheers

[Farmhand]

Don't forget that once you put all the generator coils on, if you have a differing number of coils to magnets, you will be avoiding even more drag that the test system has to overcome.

Avoiding more extra drag that you just created by adding more coils.

This needs to be tested, theory is just not good enough. And will only get us so far. It's obvious adding one coil adds drag. Why would a second coil not also add drag initially ? So you would only ever be able to avoid the drag you make. In my opinion.

It should be tested.

Cheers

P.S. I'm happy to be shown I'm wrong. I actually hope I am wrong.

[Farmhand]

Hi guys, I don't believe that adding more coils will have the effect you say. Chiefly because adding more coils will increase the power used for the system to idle at any speed and the amount "extra' used to run the machine to the same fast speed at idle will be the amount able to be saved. So you see OU will still be the same distance away. In my opinion. Or further.

If the setup uses say 78 watts to run fast with one coil and 2 watts can be saved. My bet is that if it were run at the same fast speed with two coils more than two watts extra would be used to do it and if two watts were saved then there is a loss not a gain. So I would say one extra coil would cause it to use more extra power than the extra power it would save. Just my guess.

It would be easy for you to test with you're nice neat setup. you just need another coil.

When will there be a usefull implemenation of this system ?

I think the bi-toroid setup is similar, in that he is not taking into acount how much power it takes to run the load in a normal way as compared to his way.

The input power to keep the system running at idle in his configuration as compared to normal. He just shows that the load make an inefficient process a bit more efficient.

Cheer

[Shadesz]

Don't forget that once you put all the generator coils on, if you have a differing number of coils to magnets, you will be avoiding even more drag that the test system has to overcome.

[Overunityguide]

Hello Farmhand,
So far the experiments conducted show that generation can be accomplished at high frequencies with a high impedance coil without drawing an extra load on the prime mover and actually decreased the driving load. Take into account the prime mover used in these experiments so far are not very efficient.

Now consider what would happen when the prime mover is a very high efficiency motor with energy recovery. A primary bank of batteries drives a high efficiency pulse motor (driving a mechanical load) and recovers lets say 90% of the energy into a second charging bank of batteries. Obviously if you keep swapping the batteries from front to back, eventually the batteries will become depleted to the point they will not run the load. Now if you can augment the system to make up the 10% loss and end up with a 1:1 charge ratio between the primary bank and the charging bank, then you can continually run the motor and load for free by simply swapping the banks from front back when needed.

This is where the delayed lenz effect can benefit this situation. In the scenario above, you can add enough delayed lenz generator coils to generate enough power to make up for the 10% loss WITHOUT exerting an extra load on the motor.

Also keep in mind the tests done so far had a motor driving a single coil. A single coil does not generate enough output to be of practical use. But you can add more coils WITHOUT loading down the motor. If you keep adding coils in this fashion, you will reach a point where you can generate enough power to drive the motor and its load. Hence the system would be self powering. So even with an inefficient motor, if you add enough generator coils all you have to do is get the motor up to speed so the generator can supply all the power the motor needs to run and then it will run itself. There is no free lunch here. It will cost you to build the generator and maintain it. The cost savings of not having to pay for the energy to drive the system will eventually offset the cost it took to build the generator. That is the payback period. After that point it truly runs for free.

Hope this helps.

Alex

@Alex, this is exactly what I would have said to Farmhand, Thanks for posting, it saves me a lot of time.

So one more thing to Farmhand, Please keep in mind that my setup is only showing 'proof of principle' There can be a lot done to improve this setup But that is not what I was trying to achieve...

The only two real important parameters right here are high frequency and high impedance.

With Kind Regards Overunityguide

Difference Between Shorting and Loading, Delayed Lenz / Negative Lenz Effect - YouTube

[Allen Burgess]

Magnet core output.

This may be mildly off topic, but I feel it's still germaine.

I produced a video that helps explain the whopping 20 volts of a.c. power Mr.Whip generates with his 200 mh diametric magnet core coil.

zebok3's Channel - YouTube

The video's in poor winter lighting. It's a replication of Leon Dragone's Magnet Pump. Basicly what I demonstrate here is that a pulse coil sandwiched between two disk magnets generates a current when the field is cut and then allowed to repenetrate the coil windings through seperate contacts of a DPDT switch to insure the accumulated charge is not BEMF.

The point is, the output coil magnet core can generate a current in the coil windings merely by passing the flux alone over the wraps while stationary. The rotor magnets cause the flux torque as they pass, hence the cause for the increased output along with the neutral Lenz effect.

[hherby]

Ok I don't see how it is all that much different to the effect when produced by this setup of mine. My setup just a solid state resonant generator which puts out a sine wave at about 480 Khz the amplitude can be varied. In the video it uses just about 900 Ma at 12.5 volts, so about 11.25 watts while powering a load of 6 x 5 mm LED's, not sure of the current through those not much. Then when I load the system with the cap discharger to charge a battery more energy is used there but the input current halve's, it reduces to only about 450 mA at 12.5 volts or about 5.625 watts , thereby saving me 5,625 watts from an already loaded condition. Which in my opinion is better than a saving from an idle condition eg. (no load).

So all up I saved about half of the original input by using a couple of watts.

Started with 11.25 watts slightly loaded
Went to 5.625 watts when loaded by more load, maybe a couple of more watts not much.

Obviously this is fairly efficient as compared to over 70 watts input power to supply a load with 2 watts. And much safer too I might add.

Reduced input current with added load.wmv - YouTube

I'm not saying there is anything special about this effect, I think it happens because the load is sufficient to drag down the sine wave which in turn reduces any reverse effects, of course. And this reduces losses and thereby input power. Thats just how it works.

Incase no one noticed, the amount saved was almost exactly the same as the amount it used under the extra load.

And the effect is exactly the same when a small incandescent bulb is used in place of the battery.

Cheers

Hello Farmhand,
So far the experiments conducted show that generation can be accomplished at high frequencies with a high impedance coil without drawing an extra load on the prime mover and actually decreased the driving load. Take into account the prime mover used in these experiments so far are not very efficient.

Now consider what would happen when the prime mover is a very high efficiency motor with energy recovery. A primary bank of batteries drives a high efficiency pulse motor (driving a mechanical load) and recovers lets say 90% of the energy into a second charging bank of batteries. Obviously if you keep swapping the batteries from front to back, eventually the batteries will become depleted to the point they will not run the load. Now if you can augment the system to make up the 10% loss and end up with a 1:1 charge ratio between the primary bank and the charging bank, then you can continually run the motor and load for free by simply swapping the banks from front back when needed.

This is where the delayed lenz effect can benefit this situation. In the scenario above, you can add enough delayed lenz generator coils to generate enough power to make up for the 10% loss WITHOUT exerting an extra load on the motor.

Also keep in mind the tests done so far had a motor driving a single coil. A single coil does not generate enough output to be of practical use. But you can add more coils WITHOUT loading down the motor. If you keep adding coils in this fashion, you will reach a point where you can generate enough power to drive the motor and its load. Hence the system would be self powering. So even with an inefficient motor, if you add enough generator coils all you have to do is get the motor up to speed so the generator can supply all the power the motor needs to run and then it will run itself. There is no free lunch here. It will cost you to build the generator and maintain it. The cost savings of not having to pay for the energy to drive the system will eventually offset the cost it took to build the generator. That is the payback period. After that point it truly runs for free.

Hope this helps.

Alex

[Farmhand]

Ok I don't see how it is all that much different to the effect when produced by this setup of mine. My setup is just a solid state resonant generator which puts out a sine wave at about 480 Khz the amplitude can be varied. In the video it uses just about 900 Ma at 12.5 volts, so about 11.25 watts while powering a load of 6 x 5 mm LED's, not sure of the current through those not much. Then when I load the system with the cap discharger to charge a battery more energy is used there but the input current halve's, it reduces to only about 450 mA at 12.5 volts or about 5.625 watts , thereby saving me 5,625 watts from an already loaded condition. Which in my opinion is better than a saving from an idle condition eg. (no load).

So all up I saved about half of the original input by using a couple of watts.

Started with 11.25 watts slightly loaded
Went to 5.625 watts when loaded by more load, maybe a couple of more watts not much.

Obviously this is fairly efficient as compared to over 70 watts input power to supply a load with 2 watts. And much safer too I might add.

Reduced input current with added load.wmv - YouTube

I'm not saying there is anything special about this effect, I think it happens because the load is sufficient to drag down the sine wave which in turn reduces any reverse effects, of course. And this reduces losses and thereby input power. Thats just how it works.

Incase no one noticed, the amount saved was almost exactly the same as the amount it used under the extra load.

And the effect is exactly the same when a small incandescent bulb is used in place of the battery.

Cheers

[Farmhand]

Actually to better explain what I am trying to say so that it doesn't look like I'm just a skeptic.

It's kinda like saying that if I drive down the road in a car at 10 Mph with the doors closed at 10 Mph and use 2 units of fuel and if the doors were held open it would cause load. Then if I drive down the road at 100 Mph with the doors already propped open and use 10 units of fuel and if I use load to pull the doors closed the fuel use will drop by maybe 2 units. So to go faster still uses more power especially with the doors open.

Cryptic I know. And not the best analogy. The fact remains energy is wasted to make a saving from the waste. And quite likely the generation ability of the system is reduced in this fashion.

The thing is the load needs to be powered. That is the goal.

Cheers

[Farmhand]

Hi Overunityguide, So let me get this straight, the generator is using about 78 watts but it can only give out 2 watts and reduce input by 2 watts. Seems to me that the amount of energy reducd from the input is exactly equal to the generators max output at that speed. It should be able to output more than that considering the speed it's doing and the power it is consuming. It seems the reduction in power will always be dependant on the load and the generators ability to go overspeed to waste enough energy into the system so some can be saved back. The amount of energy availiable to save will depend on the coil but only realised by adding the load to make the generator more efficient by the power consumption of the load freeing up the system.

Can the generator power the 15 watt globe better at the lower speed, like as in really light it up ? Seems like an important factor to consider.

I don't get it. You spin the rotor faster thereby wasting more power so some can be saved back. I think with this type of system the amount saved will depend on the construction of the coil and how much "Extra" speed induced idle load can be forced on the system. And still only power equal to the load the system can run will be saved. ie, you added a 15 watt globe but still only 2 watts was saved. I have a system that reduces power better than that under load. It's not a big deal. But each to thier own I guess.

If anything it seems to be getting further away from OU to me.

Be careful with those magnets ! If one flys off it could kill you like a bullet. It looks dangerous to me.

Cheers

Hi You All,

Today one YouTube User has asked me to Replace my LED Load with a normal Resistive Incandescent Light Bulb. So this is what I have done.

Here is my Video About this Subject:
Negative Lenz / Delayed Lenz Effect with an Incandescent Light Bulb as a Load - YouTube

With Kind Regards, Overunityguide

[minoly]

@Overunityguide,

Please have a look at this "Light Multiplier" video by Jonnydavro. This is a replication of Limotor's ground breaking experiment with a Joule Thief type oscillator.

Lidmotor mentioned that this was the only project Dr. Stiffler expressed interest in replicating. We would be grateful for a theory from you on how it works. Are we looking at a "Lenz Delay Propulsion" effect in these videos?

Lidmotors light multiplier replication. - YouTube

and Lidmotor's original classic:

Light Multiplier---Amp draw measurements.ASF - YouTube

Lidmotor states at 1:37 in the video that he's drawing less power when pulling a load through Maggie! The spinner must be beating the induced Lenz pole in the output coil. The input rises when Maggie's removed, an air core output coil. Those ferrite core types you guys are useing score a net loss, even with the Lenz delay propulsion assist.

I keep seeing this reference to LM's light multiplier. while I love LM's work and the versatility and ingenious use of a sphere magnet with Maggie. there is definitely nothing going on there than John Bedini's work.
a couple of things in that vid.

1. he takes the power coil away and the oscillator speeds up in solid state mode, so the amp draw increases.

2. he places it back to the rotating magnet the magnet now controls the oscillator, so it is no longer solid state, the magnet causes the oscillations to slow down, therefore the amp draw goes down. this is 100% Bedini.

3. Now you have your answer as to why the amp draw goes down when Maggie is introduced to the environment. Maggie slows down the osculations even more.

The joule thief is JB's basic SS SSG w/o the charge battery. JB would never condone my saying that because it is missing a couple of key components, however the effect of slowing down the oscillations w/ motor drag is the same.

This is why I note in an earlier post that JB's ckts would be the best candidates for a drive ckt for these "lenz-less" builds. Even if the rotor does slow down a bit, the amp draw will go down as well. Then you can have your "lenz-less" energy for free. It will then allow some room for not so perfect builds like my own :-)

Patrick

[Overunityguide]

@Overunityguide,

Please have a look at this "Light Multiplier" video by Jonnydavro. This is a replication of Limotor's ground breaking experiment with a Joule Thief type oscillator.

Lidmotor mentioned that this was the only project Dr. Stiffler expressed interest in replicating. We would be grateful for a theory from you on how it works. Are we looking at a "Lenz Delay Propulsion" effect in these videos?

Lidmotors light multiplier replication. - YouTube

and Lidmotor's original classic:

Light Multiplier---Amp draw measurements.ASF - YouTube

Lidmotor states at 1:37 in the video that he's drawing less power when pulling a load through Maggie! The spinner must be beating the induced Lenz pole in the output coil. The input rises when Maggie's removed, an air core output coil. Those ferrite core types you guys are useing score a net loss, even with the Lenz delay propulsion assist.

As for the removed oscillator coil, there is no magic there. The amp draw goes up due to the removed spinning rotor. Which acts also as a generator on the same oscillator / driving coil. So when they are moving the coil back, as expected, the amp draw goes down due to the spinning rotor magnet which than again is working as a generator.

But for the "drawing less power when pulling a load through Maggie", can be caused by the delayed lenz effect in my opinion.

With Kind Regards, Overunityguide
Incandescent Light Bulb as a Load, Negative Lenz / Delayed Lenz Effect - YouTube

[Overunityguide]

Thanks OUG. When it comes to efficient generator coils, am i right in thinking, from what's been said here, that high-impedance coils are preferable ?

Yes That is certainly true for sure.

If so then this implies high inductance and therefore many turns and perhaps coils that are fatter than they are tall ?

I think that fatter is better than taller, but also more impractical.
What really matters is many turns.

And should we be looking for high voltages that are then stepped-down ?

High voltage is what you get with high inductance, stepping it down is one of the options. But brings extra losses with it.

With Kind Regards, Overunityguide
Incandescent Light Bulb as a Load, Negative Lenz / Delayed Lenz Effect - YouTube