Bi-toroid Transformer of Thane C. Heins

[BroMikey]

CCW and CW

The picture shows them in series and the dot notation tells you the rest.

It's pretty easy, you can only wrap it two ways and hook it up two ways. Just tie them together in-phase, parallel or series. If you get zero volts, you have them backwards.

Right but I looked through all of Thanes stuff and I can't find CCW and CW anywhere. Then which way will the primary be wound?

I can hook wires up both ways but if the winds are CW and CCW and I wind them both the same? see what I mean?

Everyone thinks just reverse the wires, NO!! You can't if the coil is wound backwards.

See what I mean? Bob sent me a link about Thanes connections but it didn't work.

But one thing we have is the Auroratek diagram.

I have just finished my cores. 3 are bound together as one using high frequency ferrite material. This makes the secondary core 50 percent larger than the 2 primary links combined.

Very important to proportion the flux paths.

As shown in the Auroratek pictures the large core is a combination of 2 taped together side by side touching tightly. This is the proper way. Tape is used to keep the secondary core material together as one core.

So i am using a total of 5 high frequency ferrite cores to get the right amounts of flux path. I wound one coil and couldn't get it off the spool and the Dia. was off, just a test with a few wraps gorilla glued.

King Kong could get that stuff loose. I am searching for a smaller spool insert out back and tough paper to wind on to make it easy to slip off the winding spool.

I think I heard Thane say in a video that his winding were all the same direction but Bills has one counter wound.

That is why I am stuck. gonna figure it out for sure ahead of time.

Let see CCW and CW Which way should I go? Well I'll wind up 4 coils and try them all. No biggy if there is nothing for sure anywhere.

Mike

[Dog-One]

Here is a picture of the Auroratek diagram showing opposite windings but no designation of CCW and CW it is just follow the picture.

The picture shows them in series and the dot notation tells you the rest.

It's pretty easy, you can only wrap it two ways and hook it up two ways. Just tie them together in-phase, parallel or series. If you get zero volts, you have them backwards.

[BroMikey]

CCW AND CW windings

Here is a picture of the Auroratek diagram showing opposite windings but no designation of CCW and CW it is just follow the picture.



Free Energy Blog:2014:07:16 - PESWiki




Maybe I'll go read up.

[BroMikey]

Coil winding

Okay I made a similar machine today like this one. Well I had it and added the right size spool today is what I should say.

So from what I understand one secondary is wound CCW and the other secondary is wound CC I think. Does any one know if this is right?

I was thinking both wound in either direction the same and just reverse the wire.

I don't know what I was thinking. I guess i better read up.

I see the 120 turns information. I think it matters a great deal.

[BroMikey]

LP Record Player

I have a like new LP Record player that has inputs that maybe I could feed a signal from my generators into.

I think it is stereo so maybe I could feed both right and left channels to the Bi_toroid primary.

Then just measure how much current that is being drawn from the wall as well as how much power can be collected on the output of the BiTT secondaries.

After it is running feeding back some of the high frequency AC to the primary would eliminate the need for refined waveforms generally produced at low efficiencies. Or you could say that sinwave generators are only needed on start up. In fact if I use my Bi-TT to recharge the same battery it is running on I may need a cap dump. This is where I am not sure. It may be that the isolating nature of disconnecting caps from the system to recharge the front battery might increase system efficiencies. All of these things are something to consider. Thanes Patent claims 23X or 23 times more power is coming out than he puts in. Every possibility should be explored.

I think the battery goes up without a dump but one thing I know is a cap dump is one of the most powerful devices in battery technology and should not be left out. Battery life can be extended tremendously. Even if the pulses are as high as 8 per minute at 1 amps each this is better than the continuous heating and magnetic latch associated with DC.

Mike

[BroMikey]

Looping

Where this is going is that the younger generation can self charge batteries for the next 40 years. It won't save the world but for some people it would make their world a better way of getting around in the cities.

Watch that video of Mr. Clean where he has a resistor in between the front end and back end to recirculate power.

This is video set Don Smith 39 A-E or something like that. After that video Clean went underground with his results and only his personal friends are permitted to see the real stuff.

Oh Clean pops in with an occasional kool experiment but nothing conclusive. Many young people are afraid of becoming the next target.

There are literally thousands of ways to get extra energy from earths dyno and there are thousands of experimenters on the verge of practical OU production.

It's just ducky, so keep duckin. I agree

Mike

[BroMikey]

For Sale

Not sure where all this will lead, but it sure would be nice if a whole bunch of us start new threads titled, "My First Looper".

This is where it will lead.

PRODUCTS



The Jetson Self-Charging Electric Scooter (SSES)
500 Watt Brushless Hub Motor with 48 VDC 12 Ah Sealed Lead Acid Batteries.

Delivery beginning: Late September, 2014

Retail Price (MSRP): $1495.00
It has a range of 25 miles (40 km) between self-charging cycles.

[Dog-One]

Not sure where all this will lead, but it sure would be nice if a whole bunch of us start new threads titled, "My First Looper".

[BroMikey]

Being sure

Mike --
Just pulling up an earlier post that has Bill Alek's specs you are trying to estimate (page 9, Sept. 7th)
Bob

Thanks So much Bob I know I read that. I am sitting here ready to wind and I need to be sure.

120 turns looks about right. But like you pointed out once again is that OU windings consist of the coils being both wound in the same direction yet hooking them up so their self induction cancels.

Right now All I have are 4 ferrite C-cores and no real VFO so I am thinking about the quickest way to go for powering up.

I built one of Wesley's OU transformers and this is the same spiel he reports from his friend who he is translating for.

Thanks for repeating what you know for sure.

Also on another notation for all transformer winding projects. Always wind your coils so they match the shape of the cores. This way the wire is nearly laying flush with the core material all long the surface making a good inducing path between wire and core so as not to cause inefficiencies.

So if you have a square or rectangular area to fill with wire, do it uniformly on all 3 sides facing toward the core material. The forth side pointed toward the other secondary winding should be as close as possible to it.

Another way of thinking about this statement is that the core area should be filled up as we see in the picture so the secondaries nearly touch one another.

All of these considerations may prove to limit losses. This is standard transformer design when coupling coils of wire through the use of any cores flux paths.

Also note that in this arrangement the coils are probably wound and coated so the form of the coil is held better. It may be that a circular wind was then reshaped in a more triangular geometry so as to allow the secondary coils to travel along side each other for as long as possible.

Also fiber paper is placed between the core and coil to eliminate possible shorting of high frequency and voltage arcing.

The triangular shape coils permit that the entire coil array be pulled tightly from both directions so these coils do not become loose that may cause vibration at higher inputs.

So remember the coils have three sides to them and I believe that everything means something.

Mike

[Bob Smith]

Mike --
Just pulling up an earlier post that has Bill Alek's specs you are trying to estimate (page 9, Sept. 7th)
Bob

Don't want to derail things, but thought I'd add these notes from the above presentation by Bill Alek to the mix. You can take them for what they're worth:

"The general geometry of this transformer is very different than a traditional transformer, because what we have is a primary coil wrapped around two cores. And really, we have that same type of architecture in a standard transformer...'cause what you do in a standard transformer is that you have the material going down the centre of this coil. So really, you're splitting the flux two ways, and that's what we're doing here - splitting the input flux two ways."

"The difference is that we have these two output coils that are wired in such a way that it has a bifilar configuration. ... where the output sets up opposing magnetic forces into this [secondary core] material... There's two configurations available [for the secondary]... You can wire the output in series or in parallel; in this case they're wired in series... the ratio ...is about 20 turns here [primary] and 120 turns for each secondary. So we're actually stepping up the voltage. ... They're just single wound [secondary] coils set up in an opposing configuration."

"And what that does to the behaviouur of these coils is that they lower the natural impedance on these cores, driving it overunity, where normally, you wouldn't see that on an output coil here. ...You'd see a fixed output impedance on the secondary here. But when this operates, the behavior is quite different because we have this cancellation going on, lowering the impedance on this [secondary] coils."

In response to a question about the opposing wound secondary coils, he calls this " a key feature with building overunity devices, because we're lowering the impedance on these coils. ... There's something going on; another force involved."

Some notes:
- running the transformer at 3200 cycles per second for best performance
- input side highly reactive compared to regular transformers.
- shorting the output coils shifts the phase angle to 102 deg

More quotes:
"We're dealing with some sort of source that's all around us here, some sort of a negative energy and that's what's pushing this wave form beyond 90 degrees. there's another force at play here; this other force acts like a negative electromagnetic force; that's what's acting on the current, pushing it beyond 90 degrees."

[BroMikey]

Also look at this shot of the primary secondary comparison. Both have the same awg wire guess 18 - 20 awg wire

[BroMikey]

Rushing To Free Energy

Geez Mike, I thought this was brand new off the SFT design. Almost fell out of my chair.

Don't whip me up like that, I'm too old for the heart rush.

Hey Dog-One

It's show time, this field of work is in heavy labor pains.

Look at the windings.




Each of the twin coils in the back are as big as a mans hand, coil depth approx 16mm

coil width approx 25mm times two large coils. That is a huge mass when we take a look at the primary.

Come on where are the math boys when you need them?

Does anyone see what I am talking about here? Can someone good at coil calculations approximate wire awg and turns over a 4" inner diameter and so on?

Ratio is important here. I count 16-18 strands wide and say 10 strands across the thickness of the winding. So a coil 4" inner and 6" outer.

Inductance is given.

The primary looks ridiculously minuscule. Looking at the primary tells me this is a step up transformer maybe 50:1 ????

Talk to me coil winders.

Mike

[Dog-One]

There is no point to showing amplifier power draw as it doesn't seem to be reflective of reactive power sent back to the amp. The amp's current draw seems to be directly related to the positive half of the power wave and does not even respond to reactive power sent back.

I mentioned this mostly for motivational purposes. If you take the wattage drawn at the wall at idle and at run, subtract the difference, you will have a rough estimate of the power needed to excite the SFT. If you happen to connect something in excess of that value on the output side of the SFT, you should be excited. I will be.

Granted, if the SFT is pushing back reactive power in excess of 90 degrees, the amp will waste it. I think the sweet spot will be to keep the input at 90 degrees with whatever we can finesse out of the secondary of the SFT. So my thinking is to find a resistive load that will exactly acheive the 90 degrees. If you manage to get this, then it will be interesting to see if the idle amp power equals the run amp power. That will tell us if the amp is no longer pushing power and instead just acting as an exciter.

Anyway, that's my thinking. I'm surely open to any other suggestions. Whatever we do, don't throw away any data. Who knows yet what is really important and what is not.

[Dog-One]

Here is a self Looped Bi Toroid by MR CLEAN

Geez Mike, I thought this was brand new off the SFT design. Almost fell out of my chair.

Don't whip me up like that, I'm too old for the heart rush.

[BroMikey]

Looped Bi Toroid

Did you finally find your tape?

Yes I did thanks. If you can find me one more source let me know.

Here is a self Looped Bi Toroid by MR CLEAN

39F BiToroid: Self-Loop Experimenting, Conclusion Capacitor Bounce-Back Effect? - YouTube






Mike